Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[Christo]

I contend that GZ's head was never banged on the concrete. His injuries were not consistent with that. The prosecution should have focused more on that issue.

What caused the injuries to the back of his head? You can debate their severity. But you can't deny that he was injured.

Very minor injuries. He got away with murder, period.

The Jury disagrees with you.

So what. I disagree with the jury.

They're opinion matters. Yours does not.

Every opinion is questionable, even the jury's. I listened to the entire trial. If his head was banged into the concrete I believe his injuries would have much more severe. He profiled, followed, and thus he was the aggressor. This kid should still be alive. Who's fault is that?

You've got the media narrative down but seem to be missing the story told in the trial. It was established that Trayvon profiled Zimmerman too. You cannot logically believe George followed Trayvon to the crime scene. How did Trayvon get there after running from there? Page 30 of this thread. Trayvon either hid or doubled back. That issue has not been adequately addressed in well over year. You break someone's nose on a dark rainy night at a time when you could be safely inside. You mount that person and do not relent after he cries 20 times for help, and even after an eyewitness yells at you to stop. You get shot. That's your fault.

not if the guy you mount is armed with a gun and you know if you dont knock him out he will shoot you...that gun was in play during the struggle IMO

Ooh, I think you just admitted that Zimmerman had a right to fear great bodily harm.

 

[cstu]

So now that Zimmerman was acquitted of all charges, will you accept that it was indeed self-defense and that Martin was the aggressor and responsible for his own death.

Solid bait here. Eager to see if anyone bites.

All the court case proves about Trayvon is that there's reasonable suspicion that he would have caused serious bodily harm to GZ if he hadn't been shot.

 

[cstu]

When one makes the decision to carry a concealed firearm for personal defense and safety, that firearm must be on their persons at all times. That defensive firearm can never be out of reach if you want it for your personal safety.

I always carry a firearm on my self. I don’t lounge around the house in clothing that does not accept a holster or have a pocket for my mini. I keep a firearm on myself in my own home because it would be easy for someone to come in and get between me and my firearm. If you do not have it on you and loaded it is an expensive and useless chunk of parts.

Or, I don't know, move to a better neighborhood...

 

[pantherclub]

when the hell did jim11 come back?

So martin is going to get sued out the yin yang and will probably never have anything in life and will always be the George Zimmerman, I can live with that type of justice

 

[sho nuff]

Not to defend tim...but always clever when someone pulls out an alias like Joe McGee to offer a never post here bet.

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

The patronizing, arrogant "I told you so" tone of many people in this thread is hard for me to stomach.

2. Zimmerman is not going to be suing any media outlets. If he did he'd get his ### kicked in court.

Seriously, do you EVER get tired of just posting from a position of total ignorance?http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit

Yeah, started well before the trial. I strongly doubt he'll pursue it. If he does, I predict he will lose easily. I'm willing to put money on it, if anyone's interested.

Gobbler just PM'ed me and said he'll put $1000 on it against you.

So are we on? You want to go double or nothing or are you just going to keep following me til I have to stand my ground?

 

[bigbottom]

The patronizing, arrogant "I told you so" tone of many people in this thread is hard for me to stomach.

2. Zimmerman is not going to be suing any media outlets. If he did he'd get his ### kicked in court.

Seriously, do you EVER get tired of just posting from a position of total ignorance?http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit

Yeah, started well before the trial. I strongly doubt he'll pursue it. If he does, I predict he will lose easily. I'm willing to put money on it, if anyone's interested.

What do you mean when you say you strongly doubt he'll pursue it? What exactly are the parameters for your proposed bet? I may be interested.

 

[StrikeS2k]

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/zimmerman_saga_was_all_about_race/

Because it happened in America, the trial of George Zimmerman for shooting and killing Trayvon Martin was all about race. And because it happened in America, the people who benefit politically from the same invidious forces that led both to Trayvon Martin’s killing, and the acquittal of his killer, will deny that race had anything to do with either the killing or the verdict.

Suppose Trayvon Martin had been a 230-pound 30-year-old black man, with a loaded gun in his jacket. Suppose Zimmerman had been a 150-pound 17-year-old white kid, who was doing nothing more threatening than walking back from a convenience store to his father’s condo.

Suppose Martin had stalked Zimmerman in his car, until Zimmerman became afraid and tried to elude him. Suppose Martin had gotten out of his car and pursued Zimmerman. Suppose this led to some sort of altercation in which the big scary black man ended up with a bloody nose and some scratches on the back of his head, and the scared skinny (and unarmed) white kid had ended up with a bullet in his heart.

How do you suppose the big scary black man’s claim of “self-defense” would have gone over with a jury made up almost entirely of white women? But of course this is America, which means that the scary figure in this story is the skinny unarmed teenager, because in America pretty much any black male over the age of 12 in this sort of situation is going to be presumed to be the ”aggressor,” the “thug” – in short,” the real criminal,” until he’s proved innocent, which he won’t be, even if he’s now a dead, still unarmed teenager. And his killer is a grown man who provokes a fight with an otherwise harmless kid, starts losing it, and then shoots the kid dead.

Because this is America, pointing out that a black boy can be shot with impunity by a more or less white man because many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men is called “playing the race card.” The race card is what the people who benefit politically from the fact that many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men call any reference to the fact that race continues to play an overwhelmingly important, and overwhelmingly invidious, role in American culture in general. And in the criminal justice system in particular.

Trayvon Martin was stalked by George Zimmerman because he was black. Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black. George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin because the boy Zimmerman killed was black.

If you deny these things, you are either a liar or an idiot, or possibly both.

Nothing above requires the conclusion that the jury’s verdict was wrong as a matter of law. Florida’s laws, in their majestic equality, extend to people of all races the right to engage in vigilante killing that eliminates the sole witness to that killing. To point this out is neither a defense of those laws, nor a claim that they will in fact be applied equally. In other words, to blame this jury in this situation is to miss the point.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Paul CamposFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Paul F. Campos is a law professor, author and blogger on the faculty of the University of Colorado in Boulder. Campos received his A.B. (1982) and M.A. in English (1983) from the University of Michigan and in 1989 his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School.[1] Campos worked at the law firm Latham & Watkins in Chicago from 1989-1990 and became an Associate Professor at the University of Colorado in 1990, where he teaches classes on property, punishment theory, jurisprudence, and legal interpretation.[2]Professor Campos is not admitted to the bar in the State of Colorado,[3] Illinois,[4] or Michigan.[2][5] In 1996, Paul Campos married Kaylah Campos Zelig, a graduate of the University of Colorado Law School and an administrator at a local community college.[6][7]

Outside the legal community, Campos is perhaps best known for his 2004 book The Obesity Myth (later published as The Diet Myth) which reviews research that Campos asserts questions the connection between obesity and mortality rates.[8] Campos's contentions that obesity is not a health risk were heavily criticized by scientists, medical doctors, and public health researchers.[9][10][11][12]

Soowon Kim and Barry M Popkin praised Campos for "bringing attention to some of the complexities in overweight/obesity and health relationships and covert financial interests involved in obesity research" but criticized him for "selective use of research", "fallacious interpretation of literature" and "misunderstanding of basic epidemiological principles" and thereby "harm[ing] the most vulnerable subgroups in the population."[9] Neville Rigby criticized Campos's lack of relevant academic qualifications and poor grasp of scientific research, noting that: "It is unusual to find academics concerned chiefly with legal, social, political, and educational issues seeking to challenge the whole arena of the epidemiology, clinical, and public health aspects of the obesity problem. To start from scratch to deal with all their spurious statements in this response is hardly appropriate. The suggestion that there is growing ‘concern’ about the validity of the serious health issues associated with obesity is really quite bizarre, as there has been the most remarkable and growing consensus among an extensive range of governments, academics, health economists, and policy makers relating to the impact of excess weight gain."[10] June Stevens, Jill E McClain and Kimberly P Truesdale countered specific claims about the state of scientific research made by Campos.[13] Campos's obesity work was praised by sociologist Susie Orbach for discussing unhealthy body image issues related to an emphasis on extreme thinness.[14] His writing appears on the blog Lawyers, Guns and Money.[15]

In August 2011, Campos began a blog, Inside the Law School Scam. Initially posting anonymously, he criticizing other law school professors for not knowing enough doctrinal law or having much practical experience in legal practice. Knowing that his identity was soon to be outed, he claimed responsibility for the blog on August 20. Campos admitted[16] that he wrote a second, anonymous blog, titled Inside the Law School Scam,[17] in which he was harshly critical of the value proposition of a law school education. The blog has attracted criticism from legal scholars, including Brian Leiter of the University of Chicago Law School.[18] According to Leiter, Campos's blog contained misleading, inaccurate, and inflammatory statements.[19] Leiter also criticized Campos more broadly for allegedly shirking his job responsibilities through poor scholarship and poor teaching.[20][21][22]

However, Campos attracted support from Deborah Jones Merritt of the University of Ohio law school, who joined him as a co-blogger on "Inside the Law School Scam" [23] and from Walter Olson at the right-wing/libertarian Cato Institute.[24][25] Merritt accused law professors of being "greedy",[26] threatened litigation against those who challenged her and Campos's views[27] and suggested that law school deans should be disbarred.[28] Olson has criticized law schools for being sources of influential liberal ideas and training grounds for future liberal political leaders.[29] Another Campos supporter, Brian Tamanaha at Washington University, has also accused law professors, especially liberal law professors, of hypocrisy and greed.[30]

In 2012, Campos self-published a book on law school, "Don't go to law school . . . unless" through a vanity press.[31][32] On February 27, 2013, Campos discontinued ITLSS.[33]

This guy sounds like a real winner Tim!

 

[timschochet]

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/zimmerman_saga_was_all_about_race/

Because it happened in America, the trial of George Zimmerman for shooting and killing Trayvon Martin was all about race. And because it happened in America, the people who benefit politically from the same invidious forces that led both to Trayvon Martin’s killing, and the acquittal of his killer, will deny that race had anything to do with either the killing or the verdict.

Suppose Trayvon Martin had been a 230-pound 30-year-old black man, with a loaded gun in his jacket. Suppose Zimmerman had been a 150-pound 17-year-old white kid, who was doing nothing more threatening than walking back from a convenience store to his father’s condo.

Suppose Martin had stalked Zimmerman in his car, until Zimmerman became afraid and tried to elude him. Suppose Martin had gotten out of his car and pursued Zimmerman. Suppose this led to some sort of altercation in which the big scary black man ended up with a bloody nose and some scratches on the back of his head, and the scared skinny (and unarmed) white kid had ended up with a bullet in his heart.

How do you suppose the big scary black man’s claim of “self-defense” would have gone over with a jury made up almost entirely of white women? But of course this is America, which means that the scary figure in this story is the skinny unarmed teenager, because in America pretty much any black male over the age of 12 in this sort of situation is going to be presumed to be the ”aggressor,” the “thug” – in short,” the real criminal,” until he’s proved innocent, which he won’t be, even if he’s now a dead, still unarmed teenager. And his killer is a grown man who provokes a fight with an otherwise harmless kid, starts losing it, and then shoots the kid dead.

Because this is America, pointing out that a black boy can be shot with impunity by a more or less white man because many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men is called “playing the race card.” The race card is what the people who benefit politically from the fact that many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men call any reference to the fact that race continues to play an overwhelmingly important, and overwhelmingly invidious, role in American culture in general. And in the criminal justice system in particular.

Trayvon Martin was stalked by George Zimmerman because he was black. Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black. George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin because the boy Zimmerman killed was black.

If you deny these things, you are either a liar or an idiot, or possibly both.

Nothing above requires the conclusion that the jury’s verdict was wrong as a matter of law. Florida’s laws, in their majestic equality, extend to people of all races the right to engage in vigilante killing that eliminates the sole witness to that killing. To point this out is neither a defense of those laws, nor a claim that they will in fact be applied equally. In other words, to blame this jury in this situation is to miss the point.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Paul CamposFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Paul F. Campos is a law professor, author and blogger on the faculty of the University of Colorado in Boulder. Campos received his A.B. (1982) and M.A. in English (1983) from the University of Michigan and in 1989 his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School.[1] Campos worked at the law firm Latham & Watkins in Chicago from 1989-1990 and became an Associate Professor at the University of Colorado in 1990, where he teaches classes on property, punishment theory, jurisprudence, and legal interpretation.[2]Professor Campos is not admitted to the bar in the State of Colorado,[3] Illinois,[4] or Michigan.[2][5] In 1996, Paul Campos married Kaylah Campos Zelig, a graduate of the University of Colorado Law School and an administrator at a local community college.[6][7]

Outside the legal community, Campos is perhaps best known for his 2004 book The Obesity Myth (later published as The Diet Myth) which reviews research that Campos asserts questions the connection between obesity and mortality rates.[8] Campos's contentions that obesity is not a health risk were heavily criticized by scientists, medical doctors, and public health researchers.[9][10][11][12]

Soowon Kim and Barry M Popkin praised Campos for "bringing attention to some of the complexities in overweight/obesity and health relationships and covert financial interests involved in obesity research" but criticized him for "selective use of research", "fallacious interpretation of literature" and "misunderstanding of basic epidemiological principles" and thereby "harm[ing] the most vulnerable subgroups in the population."[9] Neville Rigby criticized Campos's lack of relevant academic qualifications and poor grasp of scientific research, noting that: "It is unusual to find academics concerned chiefly with legal, social, political, and educational issues seeking to challenge the whole arena of the epidemiology, clinical, and public health aspects of the obesity problem. To start from scratch to deal with all their spurious statements in this response is hardly appropriate. The suggestion that there is growing ‘concern’ about the validity of the serious health issues associated with obesity is really quite bizarre, as there has been the most remarkable and growing consensus among an extensive range of governments, academics, health economists, and policy makers relating to the impact of excess weight gain."[10] June Stevens, Jill E McClain and Kimberly P Truesdale countered specific claims about the state of scientific research made by Campos.[13] Campos's obesity work was praised by sociologist Susie Orbach for discussing unhealthy body image issues related to an emphasis on extreme thinness.[14] His writing appears on the blog Lawyers, Guns and Money.[15]

In August 2011, Campos began a blog, Inside the Law School Scam. Initially posting anonymously, he criticizing other law school professors for not knowing enough doctrinal law or having much practical experience in legal practice. Knowing that his identity was soon to be outed, he claimed responsibility for the blog on August 20. Campos admitted[16] that he wrote a second, anonymous blog, titled Inside the Law School Scam,[17] in which he was harshly critical of the value proposition of a law school education. The blog has attracted criticism from legal scholars, including Brian Leiter of the University of Chicago Law School.[18] According to Leiter, Campos's blog contained misleading, inaccurate, and inflammatory statements.[19] Leiter also criticized Campos more broadly for allegedly shirking his job responsibilities through poor scholarship and poor teaching.[20][21][22]

However, Campos attracted support from Deborah Jones Merritt of the University of Ohio law school, who joined him as a co-blogger on "Inside the Law School Scam" [23] and from Walter Olson at the right-wing/libertarian Cato Institute.[24][25] Merritt accused law professors of being "greedy",[26] threatened litigation against those who challenged her and Campos's views[27] and suggested that law school deans should be disbarred.[28] Olson has criticized law schools for being sources of influential liberal ideas and training grounds for future liberal political leaders.[29] Another Campos supporter, Brian Tamanaha at Washington University, has also accused law professors, especially liberal law professors, of hypocrisy and greed.[30]

In 2012, Campos self-published a book on law school, "Don't go to law school . . . unless" through a vanity press.[31][32] On February 27, 2013, Campos discontinued ITLSS.[33]

This guy sounds like a real winner Tim!

I know nothing about him. But his piece here makes a lot of sense to me, which is why I posted it. Kill the messenger?

 

[timschochet]

The patronizing, arrogant "I told you so" tone of many people in this thread is hard for me to stomach.

2. Zimmerman is not going to be suing any media outlets. If he did he'd get his ### kicked in court.

Seriously, do you EVER get tired of just posting from a position of total ignorance?http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit

Yeah, started well before the trial. I strongly doubt he'll pursue it. If he does, I predict he will lose easily. I'm willing to put money on it, if anyone's interested.

What do you mean when you say you strongly doubt he'll pursue it? What exactly are the parameters for your proposed bet? I may be interested.

If it goes to court, he will lose. It looks like it won't go to court, so there's no point of a bet.

 

[jon_mx]

Obesity and health have no connection. Bring on the donuts!

 

[StrikeS2k]

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/zimmerman_saga_was_all_about_race/

Because it happened in America, the trial of George Zimmerman for shooting and killing Trayvon Martin was all about race. And because it happened in America, the people who benefit politically from the same invidious forces that led both to Trayvon Martin’s killing, and the acquittal of his killer, will deny that race had anything to do with either the killing or the verdict.

Suppose Trayvon Martin had been a 230-pound 30-year-old black man, with a loaded gun in his jacket. Suppose Zimmerman had been a 150-pound 17-year-old white kid, who was doing nothing more threatening than walking back from a convenience store to his father’s condo.

Suppose Martin had stalked Zimmerman in his car, until Zimmerman became afraid and tried to elude him. Suppose Martin had gotten out of his car and pursued Zimmerman. Suppose this led to some sort of altercation in which the big scary black man ended up with a bloody nose and some scratches on the back of his head, and the scared skinny (and unarmed) white kid had ended up with a bullet in his heart.

How do you suppose the big scary black man’s claim of “self-defense” would have gone over with a jury made up almost entirely of white women? But of course this is America, which means that the scary figure in this story is the skinny unarmed teenager, because in America pretty much any black male over the age of 12 in this sort of situation is going to be presumed to be the ”aggressor,” the “thug” – in short,” the real criminal,” until he’s proved innocent, which he won’t be, even if he’s now a dead, still unarmed teenager. And his killer is a grown man who provokes a fight with an otherwise harmless kid, starts losing it, and then shoots the kid dead.

Because this is America, pointing out that a black boy can be shot with impunity by a more or less white man because many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men is called “playing the race card.” The race card is what the people who benefit politically from the fact that many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men call any reference to the fact that race continues to play an overwhelmingly important, and overwhelmingly invidious, role in American culture in general. And in the criminal justice system in particular.

Trayvon Martin was stalked by George Zimmerman because he was black. Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black. George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin because the boy Zimmerman killed was black.

If you deny these things, you are either a liar or an idiot, or possibly both.

Nothing above requires the conclusion that the jury’s verdict was wrong as a matter of law. Florida’s laws, in their majestic equality, extend to people of all races the right to engage in vigilante killing that eliminates the sole witness to that killing. To point this out is neither a defense of those laws, nor a claim that they will in fact be applied equally. In other words, to blame this jury in this situation is to miss the point.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Paul CamposFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Paul F. Campos is a law professor, author and blogger on the faculty of the University of Colorado in Boulder. Campos received his A.B. (1982) and M.A. in English (1983) from the University of Michigan and in 1989 his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School.[1] Campos worked at the law firm Latham & Watkins in Chicago from 1989-1990 and became an Associate Professor at the University of Colorado in 1990, where he teaches classes on property, punishment theory, jurisprudence, and legal interpretation.[2]Professor Campos is not admitted to the bar in the State of Colorado,[3] Illinois,[4] or Michigan.[2][5] In 1996, Paul Campos married Kaylah Campos Zelig, a graduate of the University of Colorado Law School and an administrator at a local community college.[6][7]

Outside the legal community, Campos is perhaps best known for his 2004 book The Obesity Myth (later published as The Diet Myth) which reviews research that Campos asserts questions the connection between obesity and mortality rates.[8] Campos's contentions that obesity is not a health risk were heavily criticized by scientists, medical doctors, and public health researchers.[9][10][11][12]

Soowon Kim and Barry M Popkin praised Campos for "bringing attention to some of the complexities in overweight/obesity and health relationships and covert financial interests involved in obesity research" but criticized him for "selective use of research", "fallacious interpretation of literature" and "misunderstanding of basic epidemiological principles" and thereby "harm[ing] the most vulnerable subgroups in the population."[9] Neville Rigby criticized Campos's lack of relevant academic qualifications and poor grasp of scientific research, noting that: "It is unusual to find academics concerned chiefly with legal, social, political, and educational issues seeking to challenge the whole arena of the epidemiology, clinical, and public health aspects of the obesity problem. To start from scratch to deal with all their spurious statements in this response is hardly appropriate. The suggestion that there is growing ‘concern’ about the validity of the serious health issues associated with obesity is really quite bizarre, as there has been the most remarkable and growing consensus among an extensive range of governments, academics, health economists, and policy makers relating to the impact of excess weight gain."[10] June Stevens, Jill E McClain and Kimberly P Truesdale countered specific claims about the state of scientific research made by Campos.[13] Campos's obesity work was praised by sociologist Susie Orbach for discussing unhealthy body image issues related to an emphasis on extreme thinness.[14] His writing appears on the blog Lawyers, Guns and Money.[15]

In August 2011, Campos began a blog, Inside the Law School Scam. Initially posting anonymously, he criticizing other law school professors for not knowing enough doctrinal law or having much practical experience in legal practice. Knowing that his identity was soon to be outed, he claimed responsibility for the blog on August 20. Campos admitted[16] that he wrote a second, anonymous blog, titled Inside the Law School Scam,[17] in which he was harshly critical of the value proposition of a law school education. The blog has attracted criticism from legal scholars, including Brian Leiter of the University of Chicago Law School.[18] According to Leiter, Campos's blog contained misleading, inaccurate, and inflammatory statements.[19] Leiter also criticized Campos more broadly for allegedly shirking his job responsibilities through poor scholarship and poor teaching.[20][21][22]

However, Campos attracted support from Deborah Jones Merritt of the University of Ohio law school, who joined him as a co-blogger on "Inside the Law School Scam" [23] and from Walter Olson at the right-wing/libertarian Cato Institute.[24][25] Merritt accused law professors of being "greedy",[26] threatened litigation against those who challenged her and Campos's views[27] and suggested that law school deans should be disbarred.[28] Olson has criticized law schools for being sources of influential liberal ideas and training grounds for future liberal political leaders.[29] Another Campos supporter, Brian Tamanaha at Washington University, has also accused law professors, especially liberal law professors, of hypocrisy and greed.[30]

In 2012, Campos self-published a book on law school, "Don't go to law school . . . unless" through a vanity press.[31][32] On February 27, 2013, Campos discontinued ITLSS.[33]

This guy sounds like a real winner Tim!

I know nothing about him. But his piece here makes a lot of sense to me, which is why I posted it. Kill the messenger?

Wat???? If someone posts a link to fox news or FAIR you discount it completely simply due to the source. But what if the "piece" makes sense? Oh, no, you can't have that. Here is yet another example of your hypocrisy. From the links someone else posted as well as mine it's pretty obvious this guy is a nutjob. But hey, his "piece" fits your narrative so you post is as if it has value. And you wonder why I have such disdain for you.

 

[Riversco]

What am I going to have for dinner tonight Tim?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

pay up, mother####er.

 

[timschochet]

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/zimmerman_saga_was_all_about_race/

Because it happened in America, the trial of George Zimmerman for shooting and killing Trayvon Martin was all about race. And because it happened in America, the people who benefit politically from the same invidious forces that led both to Trayvon Martin’s killing, and the acquittal of his killer, will deny that race had anything to do with either the killing or the verdict.

Suppose Trayvon Martin had been a 230-pound 30-year-old black man, with a loaded gun in his jacket. Suppose Zimmerman had been a 150-pound 17-year-old white kid, who was doing nothing more threatening than walking back from a convenience store to his father’s condo.

Suppose Martin had stalked Zimmerman in his car, until Zimmerman became afraid and tried to elude him. Suppose Martin had gotten out of his car and pursued Zimmerman. Suppose this led to some sort of altercation in which the big scary black man ended up with a bloody nose and some scratches on the back of his head, and the scared skinny (and unarmed) white kid had ended up with a bullet in his heart.

How do you suppose the big scary black man’s claim of “self-defense” would have gone over with a jury made up almost entirely of white women? But of course this is America, which means that the scary figure in this story is the skinny unarmed teenager, because in America pretty much any black male over the age of 12 in this sort of situation is going to be presumed to be the ”aggressor,” the “thug” – in short,” the real criminal,” until he’s proved innocent, which he won’t be, even if he’s now a dead, still unarmed teenager. And his killer is a grown man who provokes a fight with an otherwise harmless kid, starts losing it, and then shoots the kid dead.

Because this is America, pointing out that a black boy can be shot with impunity by a more or less white man because many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men is called “playing the race card.” The race card is what the people who benefit politically from the fact that many white Americans are terrified by black boys and men call any reference to the fact that race continues to play an overwhelmingly important, and overwhelmingly invidious, role in American culture in general. And in the criminal justice system in particular.

Trayvon Martin was stalked by George Zimmerman because he was black. Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black. George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin because the boy Zimmerman killed was black.

If you deny these things, you are either a liar or an idiot, or possibly both.

Nothing above requires the conclusion that the jury’s verdict was wrong as a matter of law. Florida’s laws, in their majestic equality, extend to people of all races the right to engage in vigilante killing that eliminates the sole witness to that killing. To point this out is neither a defense of those laws, nor a claim that they will in fact be applied equally. In other words, to blame this jury in this situation is to miss the point.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Paul CamposFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Paul F. Campos is a law professor, author and blogger on the faculty of the University of Colorado in Boulder. Campos received his A.B. (1982) and M.A. in English (1983) from the University of Michigan and in 1989 his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School.[1] Campos worked at the law firm Latham & Watkins in Chicago from 1989-1990 and became an Associate Professor at the University of Colorado in 1990, where he teaches classes on property, punishment theory, jurisprudence, and legal interpretation.[2]Professor Campos is not admitted to the bar in the State of Colorado,[3] Illinois,[4] or Michigan.[2][5] In 1996, Paul Campos married Kaylah Campos Zelig, a graduate of the University of Colorado Law School and an administrator at a local community college.[6][7]

Outside the legal community, Campos is perhaps best known for his 2004 book The Obesity Myth (later published as The Diet Myth) which reviews research that Campos asserts questions the connection between obesity and mortality rates.[8] Campos's contentions that obesity is not a health risk were heavily criticized by scientists, medical doctors, and public health researchers.[9][10][11][12]

Soowon Kim and Barry M Popkin praised Campos for "bringing attention to some of the complexities in overweight/obesity and health relationships and covert financial interests involved in obesity research" but criticized him for "selective use of research", "fallacious interpretation of literature" and "misunderstanding of basic epidemiological principles" and thereby "harm[ing] the most vulnerable subgroups in the population."[9] Neville Rigby criticized Campos's lack of relevant academic qualifications and poor grasp of scientific research, noting that: "It is unusual to find academics concerned chiefly with legal, social, political, and educational issues seeking to challenge the whole arena of the epidemiology, clinical, and public health aspects of the obesity problem. To start from scratch to deal with all their spurious statements in this response is hardly appropriate. The suggestion that there is growing ‘concern’ about the validity of the serious health issues associated with obesity is really quite bizarre, as there has been the most remarkable and growing consensus among an extensive range of governments, academics, health economists, and policy makers relating to the impact of excess weight gain."[10] June Stevens, Jill E McClain and Kimberly P Truesdale countered specific claims about the state of scientific research made by Campos.[13] Campos's obesity work was praised by sociologist Susie Orbach for discussing unhealthy body image issues related to an emphasis on extreme thinness.[14] His writing appears on the blog Lawyers, Guns and Money.[15]

In August 2011, Campos began a blog, Inside the Law School Scam. Initially posting anonymously, he criticizing other law school professors for not knowing enough doctrinal law or having much practical experience in legal practice. Knowing that his identity was soon to be outed, he claimed responsibility for the blog on August 20. Campos admitted[16] that he wrote a second, anonymous blog, titled Inside the Law School Scam,[17] in which he was harshly critical of the value proposition of a law school education. The blog has attracted criticism from legal scholars, including Brian Leiter of the University of Chicago Law School.[18] According to Leiter, Campos's blog contained misleading, inaccurate, and inflammatory statements.[19] Leiter also criticized Campos more broadly for allegedly shirking his job responsibilities through poor scholarship and poor teaching.[20][21][22]

However, Campos attracted support from Deborah Jones Merritt of the University of Ohio law school, who joined him as a co-blogger on "Inside the Law School Scam" [23] and from Walter Olson at the right-wing/libertarian Cato Institute.[24][25] Merritt accused law professors of being "greedy",[26] threatened litigation against those who challenged her and Campos's views[27] and suggested that law school deans should be disbarred.[28] Olson has criticized law schools for being sources of influential liberal ideas and training grounds for future liberal political leaders.[29] Another Campos supporter, Brian Tamanaha at Washington University, has also accused law professors, especially liberal law professors, of hypocrisy and greed.[30]

In 2012, Campos self-published a book on law school, "Don't go to law school . . . unless" through a vanity press.[31][32] On February 27, 2013, Campos discontinued ITLSS.[33]

This guy sounds like a real winner Tim!

I know nothing about him. But his piece here makes a lot of sense to me, which is why I posted it. Kill the messenger?

Wat???? If someone posts a link to fox news or FAIR you discount it completely simply due to the source. But what if the "piece" makes sense? Oh, no, you can't have that. Here is yet another example of your hypocrisy. From the links someone else posted as well as mine it's pretty obvious this guy is a nutjob. But hey, his "piece" fits your narrative so you post is as if it has value. And you wonder why I have such disdain for you.

First off I don't recall doing that (discounting articles based on the source.) If an article makes sense to me I'd like to think I would acknowledge it, whoever the author is. And vice-versa.

But if I DID do that in the past, then I was wrong. In the past.

 

[timschochet]

What am I going to have for dinner tonight Tim?

Mexican?

 

[jon_mx]

I have not decided which piece was nuttier, the Zimmerman or his theory on obesity.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

I heard from insider this is what actually happened after last night's press conference

 

[Riversco]

What am I going to have for dinner tonight Tim?

Mexican?

How much would you like to bet?

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

The patronizing, arrogant "I told you so" tone of many people in this thread is hard for me to stomach.

2. Zimmerman is not going to be suing any media outlets. If he did he'd get his ### kicked in court.

Seriously, do you EVER get tired of just posting from a position of total ignorance?http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit

Yeah, started well before the trial. I strongly doubt he'll pursue it. If he does, I predict he will lose easily. I'm willing to put money on it, if anyone's interested.

Gobbler just PM'ed me and said he'll put $1000 on it against you.

So are we on? You want to go double or nothing or are you just going to keep following me til I have to stand my ground?

Can't believe you're posting in this thread now. I have only 3 words for you: pay up, mother####er.

What, I don't get a chance to win my money back? What kind of BS is that?!? So you don't believe in self defense and you don't believe in a persons right to win their money back? What do you believe in?

 

[timschochet]

I really hope they televise the civil trial. I've been waiting forever for Zimmerman to take the stand...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hope he's learned something from this whole thing. Can't say I am surprised by the verdicts in the least. Major thanks to Ramasay, YankeeFan and the other LawyerGuys helping us wade through the and get good information. I learned a great deal, especially about Florida law. Texas has always seemed like the closest state we have to "the wild west" but Florida seems to be right up there with them. Wondering what, if anything, the legislature down there had learned from this.

Can we do away with this is well? This wasn't a Stand Your Ground case. It was a self-defense case. Every state recognizes a person's right to defend himself.

Do away with what? I didn't say it was a stand your ground case and understood it wasn't despite trying to be told over and over it was. I also understand every state recognizes a person's right to defend themselves. That right is a lot more "liberal" in some states than others. If you don't think Florida is on the liberal side we'll agree to disagree. I'd like to hear your argument as to why it's not any more/less liberal than any other state though.

I'd like to know how you think the verdict would be any different in the state you live in..

 

[timschochet]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hope he's learned something from this whole thing. Can't say I am surprised by the verdicts in the least. Major thanks to Ramasay, YankeeFan and the other LawyerGuys helping us wade through the and get good information. I learned a great deal, especially about Florida law. Texas has always seemed like the closest state we have to "the wild west" but Florida seems to be right up there with them. Wondering what, if anything, the legislature down there had learned from this.

You do realize this wasn't a stand your ground case, and the portion of the self defense laws in Florida that applied to this case are equal to that of most states in the country.. Including the one you live in..

In my state it takes more than just the simple claim of it being "self defense". That's essentially the "burden" the defense has in FL.

You say this but in light of all the evidence in the case.. And testimony I watched with my own 2 eyes, I'm calling BS.. There is no evidence to prove your claim that you only have to claim "self defense" and that is the only burden the defense has in Florida.. There were witnesses placing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, the same witness told us that he said to stop, but trayvon would not stop. Also that Zimmerman was screaming for help..

The outcome would have been the same if the case were tried in South Carolina..

 

[jon_mx]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

Me too. Someone on this thread owes me $100. Can I get a free subscription or something.

 

[bigbottom]

The patronizing, arrogant "I told you so" tone of many people in this thread is hard for me to stomach.

2. Zimmerman is not going to be suing any media outlets. If he did he'd get his ### kicked in court.

Seriously, do you EVER get tired of just posting from a position of total ignorance?http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit

Yeah, started well before the trial. I strongly doubt he'll pursue it. If he does, I predict he will lose easily. I'm willing to put money on it, if anyone's interested.

What do you mean when you say you strongly doubt he'll pursue it? What exactly are the parameters for your proposed bet? I may be interested.

If it goes to court, he will lose. It looks like it won't go to court, so there's no point of a bet.

It's already in court. If you mean that it won't go to trial, I tend to agree because it is likely that it will settle and GZ will get paid. I'd consider that pursuing a claim and I wouldn't consider it losing.

 

[Rayderr]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

Mods, do you hate it when people ask you questions in threads instead of pming you?

 

[bigbottom]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

I don't think you do.

 

[timschochet]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

I don't think you do.

No I do. I'm just #####ing and whining because I'm frustrated. I know I won't get anywhere...

 

[Rayderr]

Obama makes statement following Zimmerman verdict

Posted by
CNN Political Unit

(CNN) - President Barack Obama issued the following statement Sunday following the verdict in the George Zimmerman trial.

"The death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that’s a job for all of us. That’s the way to honor Trayvon Martin."


Filed under: President Obama

 

[bigbottom]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

I don't think you do.

No I do. I'm just #####ing and whining because I'm frustrated. I know I won't get anywhere...

You really should just let it go. No reason to let it eat at you. You're allowing him to wreck your calm on top of stiffing you.

 

[identikit]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

Mods, do you hate it when people ask you questions in threads instead of pming you?

 

[greenroom]

Hope he's learned something from this whole thing. Can't say I am surprised by the verdicts in the least. Major thanks to Ramasay, YankeeFan and the other LawyerGuys helping us wade through the and get good information. I learned a great deal, especially about Florida law. Texas has always seemed like the closest state we have to "the wild west" but Florida seems to be right up there with them. Wondering what, if anything, the legislature down there had learned from this.

You do realize this wasn't a stand your ground case, and the portion of the self defense laws in Florida that applied to this case are equal to that of most states in the country.. Including the one you live in..

In my state it takes more than just the simple claim of it being "self defense". That's essentially the "burden" the defense has in FL.

You say this but in light of all the evidence in the case.. And testimony I watched with my own 2 eyes, I'm calling BS.. There is no evidence to prove your claim that you only have to claim "self defense" and that is the only burden the defense has in Florida.. There were witnesses placing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, the same witness told us that he said to stop, but trayvon would not stop. Also that Zimmerman was screaming for help..

The outcome would have been the same if the case were tried in South Carolina..

And link to where Martin heard this witness?

Link to where Martin could not be defending him self?

I will save you the time.. There is no proof of who started the fight and who had the self defense.

Also keep in mind OJ Simpson was found Not Guilty as well, yet we all know he did it. Sometimes the courts do not have enough evidence in a he said/he is dead case! Since there is no one who can provide the key information of what happened that night, other than Zimmerman who's story has been proven to have holes, but not enough to not convict him.

 

[timschochet]

Good statement by Obama. But part of me hopes he has the Feds charge GZ anyhow, just because it would piss so many people off. And most of the ones who would be pissed off hate Obama's guts anyhow, so why should he care?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

MSNBC reporting that black people around the country are outraged- they feel as if a black life is not worth as much as a white life. This is, of course, based on tweets and it's all anecdotal, but I believe it. I think this is really how most black Americans feel tonight.

That's always the crux of these things; the feeling that America doesn't value the life if young black men.

Dude, young black men don't value the lives of young black men. They need to do that before everyone else will.

Sick, disgusting comment.

You're a POS.

Why. I think it's an accurate statement. There should be more focus on black on black crime but we as a country are too scared to address it.

Seriously...something like 50 black males were shot over Father's day weekend in Chicago. Something like 9 died.The year before it was even more...over the same timeframe.

But no one is really up in arms over it...I really don't get it. We focused so much time, effort and money on this useless dog of a case...but put no effort into Chicago? Or any of the other inner city nightmares like Beirut...I mean, Detroit...

We really have taken our eyes off the prize and just keep getting conned by the race-baiting charlatans.

Great post TD

They're right Gachi. Ignoring the black on black violence is making the issues worse, not better.

@marclamonthill: There is nothing more arrogant, paternalistic, & wrongheaded than White people telling us we can't grieve for Trayvon bc of Chicago deaths.

Who said you couldn't grieve for Trayvon? The argument is whether it was a racially motivated incident, if race played into the verdict, or if race has played a part in the biased media coverage..

So now basically, I'm going to be told if I don't disagree with the verdict I'm racist and if I disagree with that, I'm "arrogant, paternalistic, & wrongheaded" and in some way not allowing you to grieve for Trayvon..

In order for you to grieve for trayvon I must accept that the verdict of the trial was wrong and that white people as a whole are racist..

Sorry buddy.. You're not getting that from me.. You're wrong..

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

C'mon Tim, c'mon Mr Expert In All Things. Quit running to the mods to help solve your problems. In betting doesn't a person usually get a chance to go double or nothing? Well? C'mon Mr Expert. You say Zimmerman won't win a suit against the media. Well, put my money where your mouth is partner.

 

[Dr Oadi]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

I don't think you do.

No I do. I'm just #####ing and whining because I'm frustrated. I know I won't get anywhere...

If you lived in Flowridayou could go get your money one way or the other.

 

[Rayderr]

Good statement by Obama. But part of me hopes he has the Feds charge GZ anyhow, just because it would piss so many people off. And most of the ones who would be pissed off hate Obama's guts anyhow, so why should he care?

Yes, and that's exactly what the DOJ is there for. To piss off people who have a difference of opinion than you.

 

[timschochet]

Good statement by Obama. But part of me hopes he has the Feds charge GZ anyhow, just because it would piss so many people off. And most of the ones who would be pissed off hate Obama's guts anyhow, so why should he care?

Yes, and that's exactly what the DOJ is there for. To piss off people who have a difference of opinion than you.

Man that would be so awesome!

 

[timschochet]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

I don't think you do.

No I do. I'm just #####ing and whining because I'm frustrated. I know I won't get anywhere...

You really should just let it go. No reason to let it eat at you. You're allowing him to wreck your calm on top of stiffing you.

You're right. From now on I will just ignore him. Hopefully others will do the same.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

This is a joke, right?

 

[RBM]

Good statement by Obama. But part of me hopes he has the Feds charge GZ anyhow, just because it would piss so many people off. And most of the ones who would be pissed off hate Obama's guts anyhow, so why should he care?

All due respect Tim, you know I like you, but you're out of your mind with this statement. I think you got a little too invested in this story and are going off the deep end. It's over, time to back away.

 

[otello]

Does not sound like Obama agreed with the verdict.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Does not sound like Obama agreed with the verdict.

It's pretty weak slipping in that gun violence statement. Does he bring up gun violence every time a cop shoots someone legally?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Mods, I get that private wagers between posters are none of your concern, but should this guy be allowed to continue to post here with impunity after refusing to pay and then laughing about it for months afterward? Dr. Gobbler owes me $80 and Jmon $30. It's all on record. He doesn't deny it. Can't he at least be suspended until he pays up?

This is a joke, right?

His account and his general posting style? Pretty much.

 

[jon_mx]

Good statement by Obama. But part of me hopes he has the Feds charge GZ anyhow, just because it would piss so many people off. And most of the ones who would be pissed off hate Obama's guts anyhow, so why should he care?

All due respect Tim, you know I like you, but you're out of your mind with this statement. I think you got a little too invested in this story and are going off the deep end. It's over, time to back away.

Please don't interfere with a perfectly good explosion. TIA

 

[otello]

Judging by the lack of reaction to this verdict, from a rioting perspective, is it fair to assume that that the country agrees with the verdict?

 

[StrikeS2k]

First off I don't recall doing that (discounting articles based on the source.) If an article makes sense to me I'd like to think I would acknowledge it, whoever the author is. And vice-versa.

But if I DID do that in the past, then I was wrong. In the past.

Yeah, right. And you don't ever personally insult people either.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

No blacks on the jury. Juror number 6 may be black may be Hispanic we don't know..... Not saying white women cant bring justice but white women have been taught as the most vulnerable people to black men..... Bet b funny.

... wow..

 

[timschochet]

Judging by the lack of reaction to this verdict, from a rioting perspective, is it fair to assume that that the country agrees with the verdict?

No, it is fair to assume that black people don't behave like animals when they don't like a result.