Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[IvanKaramazov]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

 

[squistion]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

Nope. Just because a jury finds a defendant not guilty, that is not the same as finding him innocent.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

Nope. Just because a jury finds a defendant not guilty, that is not the same as finding him innocent.

Right, but this wasn't some close decision. Read the thread. Even people who originally supported charging Zimmerman later came around to the view that there just wasn't a case there.

Edit: In other words, prosecutors were correct the first time when they concluded that charging Zimmerman would be a waste of time and resources. That's not to say that he's a Good Guy or that he should be a role model for my neighbors, just that criminal charges were unwarranted.

 

[avoiding injuries]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

Nope. Just because a jury finds a defendant not guilty, that is not the same as finding him innocent.

So much for "innocent until proven guilty".

 

[squistion]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

Nope. Just because a jury finds a defendant not guilty, that is not the same as finding him innocent.

Right, but this wasn't some close decision. Read the thread. Even people who originally supported charging Zimmerman later came around to the view that there just wasn't a case there.

Edit: In other words, prosecutors were correct the first time when they concluded that charging Zimmerman would be a waste of time and resources. That's not to say that he's a Good Guy or that he should be a role model for my neighbors, just that criminal charges were unwarranted.

I don't use people in this thread who were originally advocated charging Zimmerman as the last word on whether this was or was not a legitimate case. They didn't speak for me then and they don't now.

 

[Slapdash]

It could be blacks are a lot more likely to commit other crimes for what they were picked up for which resulted in them being arrested and charged with marijuana.

That's probably right. I think this is where crimes like "driving while black" come in.

 

[avoiding injuries]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

Nope. Just because a jury finds a defendant not guilty, that is not the same as finding him innocent.

Right, but this wasn't some close decision. Read the thread. Even people who originally supported charging Zimmerman later came around to the view that there just wasn't a case there.

Edit: In other words, prosecutors were correct the first time when they concluded that charging Zimmerman would be a waste of time and resources. That's not to say that he's a Good Guy or that he should be a role model for my neighbors, just that criminal charges were unwarranted.

I don't use people in this thread who originally advocated charging Zimmerman as the last word on whether this was or was not a legitimate case. They didn't speak for me then and they don't now.

Oh, so what is your criteria? It obviously isn't the jurors.

 

[squistion]

After hearing this story, I'm going rioting this weekend, maybe tonight. Any white boys with me?? I wonder if President Obama will comment on this case and calm me down.

I am not sure why the race-baiters choose the Zimmerman case. There were probably legitimate cases where real racism was involved and much more questionable self-defense claims were raised. I think Zimmerman is legitimately innocent and was scared as hell and is not even remotely a racist. Terrible case to hang their hats on. The race-baiters lost more legitimacy similar to what they did in the Duke rape case.

Zimmerman was not charged with anything until 45 days after Martin was killed, and never would have been if not from outrage in the black community - that is why it became a national story and other cases have not. If he had been charged right away, this never would generated more than local media interest in Florida (if that).

Exactly. Had it not been for race-baiters and others who jumped to what ended up being a completely unwarranted conclusion, this case would have resolved itself quietly.

Nope. Just because a jury finds a defendant not guilty, that is not the same as finding him innocent.

So much for "innocent until proven guilty".

I have never yet seen a jury return a verdict of innocent.

And OJ and Casey Anthony were found not guilty in their respective criminal trials, I doubt you would proclaim them as being innocent.

 

[timschochet]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

 

[jon_mx]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

The police investigator believed Zimmerman but believed that a crime was still committed. The police investigator is an expert on gather facts and conducting interrogations. He is not an expert on the law. The prosecution who understands the law, correctly knew there was not a case against Zimmerman.

 

[timschochet]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.

And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

 

[jonessed]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

 

[timschochet]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

The police investigator believed Zimmerman but believed that a crime was still committed. The police investigator is an expert on gather facts and conducting interrogations. He is not an expert on the law. The prosecution who understands the law, correctly knew there was not a case against Zimmerman.

You know it's really ironic that you're always accusing me of making statements without anything to back them up, and yet I have never encountered anyone here who does this as much as you do, and with such incredible authority. Your comments here have absolutely nothing to do with what happened, because you don't KNOW what happened. You conveniently ignore the fact that the Sanford prosecutors and police have a long history of racism against blacks, and this may have played a part in their initial decision not to prosecute (certainly that is what a large majority of blacks who live in that area believe.) But I doubt you would accept this because every time I or anyone else has tried to demonstrate the facts of institutionalized racism, you have denied it, even going to the extent of looking for any excuse rather than to acknowledge that it exists in our society (as you did last night with your absurd marijuana comments.) You are determined to live in your own world in which police racism against blacks doesn't exist. But that's not the real world.

 

[timschochet]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

 

[jonessed]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

They acquitted on manslaughter as well.

There was an acquittal which means the prosecution didn't have a good case and he shouldn't have been charged. That's it. The rest is hot air and lame excuses.

 

[jon_mx]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

The police investigator believed Zimmerman but believed that a crime was still committed. The police investigator is an expert on gather facts and conducting interrogations. He is not an expert on the law. The prosecution who understands the law, correctly knew there was not a case against Zimmerman.

You know it's really ironic that you're always accusing me of making statements without anything to back them up, and yet I have never encountered anyone here who does this as much as you do, and with such incredible authority. Your comments here have absolutely nothing to do with what happened, because you don't KNOW what happened. You conveniently ignore the fact that the Sanford prosecutors and police have a long history of racism against blacks, and this may have played a part in their initial decision not to prosecute (certainly that is what a large majority of blacks who live in that area believe.) But I doubt you would accept this because every time I or anyone else has tried to demonstrate the facts of institutionalized racism, you have denied it, even going to the extent of looking for any excuse rather than to acknowledge that it exists in our society (as you did last night with your absurd marijuana comments.) You are determined to live in your own world in which police racism against blacks doesn't exist. But that's not the real world.

Do you have one piece of evidence that the prosecutor in this case was racist against blacks??????????????????????????? The 'racism' in the 2010 incident had more to do with the accused being a son of a lieutenant and his grandfather was a circuit judge than about race. Yes, it was wrong, but it has zero to do with this case. If anything it made them hyper-sensitive to issues of racism. I made an accurate statement about the findings and the roles of the lead investigator and the prosecutor and you just ignore it and pull out some pathetic guilt by association. Good god, you had the gull to suggest it was me who was guilty of arguing emotions, but that is all you have in this case. You have been wrong, wrong, wrong about o many things. At least you had been honest about knowing there was not enough evidence to convict, but crap now you are even backtracking on that issue.

 

[jon_mx]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

If the jury believed believed that Zimmerman feared for his life and acted in self-defense (or at least it raised reasonable doubt), it does not matter one bit if the charge was manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I'm not angry with you. Basically, I think you're a ####### idiot.

For what? For showing you the actual facts of the case? You're being deliberately obtuse here, Alex. Did you even read anything? Or is this just a knee-jerk reaction?

You are narrowly focused on poorly written laws - as are most people in here - rather than a reasonable relationship in outcomes. I'm not going to pretend that Zimmerman should have been convicted....IMO these cases were decided fairly consistently with the law as written. All that I'm question - as are many others in here and in the broader public - is whether or not there is any logic to the laws as written.

THAT is the debate which should be taking place, and frankly it is being broadly ignored.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

If the jury believed believed that Zimmerman feared for his life and acted in self-defense (or at least it raised reasonable doubt), it does not matter one bit if the charge was manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.

He should have feared for his life. If someone stalked me and put my life in danger, I would want to kill the ####### too. So yeah, Zimmerman feared for his life because he's a loose-cannon, vigilante ####.

 

[jon_mx]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

If the jury believed believed that Zimmerman feared for his life and acted in self-defense (or at least it raised reasonable doubt), it does not matter one bit if the charge was manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.

He should have feared for his life. If someone stalked me and put my life in danger, I would want to kill the ####### too. So yeah, Zimmerman feared for his life because he's a loose-cannon, vigilante ####.

Stalked.....

Keep up your good work at pretending not to know any of the facts in this case.

 

[Joe McGee]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

If the jury believed believed that Zimmerman feared for his life and acted in self-defense (or at least it raised reasonable doubt), it does not matter one bit if the charge was manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.

He should have feared for his life. If someone stalked me and put my life in danger, I would want to kill the ####### too. So yeah, Zimmerman feared for his life because he's a loose-cannon, vigilante ####.

Man, one troll leaves and another takes his place.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

With all the above there is no reason for Trayvon to lead his follower (stalker from his eyes) to his brother.

 

[jon_mx]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

If the jury believed believed that Zimmerman feared for his life and acted in self-defense (or at least it raised reasonable doubt), it does not matter one bit if the charge was manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.

He should have feared for his life. If someone stalked me and put my life in danger, I would want to kill the ####### too. So yeah, Zimmerman feared for his life because he's a loose-cannon, vigilante ####.

Man, one troll leaves and another takes his place.

Uh, yeah, it's trolling to call Zimmerman what he is.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

He can't answer the question, because either a) he has to lie, or b) the truth will completely shread his flawed, idiotic premise.

 

[jon_mx]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

He can't answer the question, because either a) he has to lie, or b) the truth will completely shread his flawed, idiotic premise.

I was laughing at the fact you imply that Martin was worried about Zimmerman raping his younger brother. Just classic stuff. Keep up the solid work.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

No you weren't Jon.

Now you are liar. Yet again. Anyone can see what you quoted and what you laughed at.

 

[timschochet]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

 

[jon_mx]

No you weren't Jon.

Now you are liar. Yet again. Anyone can see what you quoted and what you laughed at.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

Bye.

 

[greenroom]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

jon_mx cannot answer the question because his talking points don't cover anything that is factual that favors Martin. He only understands facts that put Martin in a bad light.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

I don't think it exists nearly to the level it did 20-30 years ago and I think it has dropped below the line of the African American community using it as an excuse. There is just too much information/communication/transperency in our society to allow this to happen very often anymore, regardless of intent. TVs in the courtroom, cell phone cameras, twitter, police car dashboard cameras, ect. Sorry Tim. You and your friends in the African American community are living in the past.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

I think there's quite a bit of truth to this. But this particular case isn't an illustration of it.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

I don't think it exists nearly to the level it did 20-30 years ago and I think it has dropped below the line of the African American community using it as an excuse. There is just too much information/communication/transperency in our society to allow this to happen very often anymore, regardless of intent. TVs in the courtroom, cell phone cameras, twitter, police car dashboard cameras, ect. Sorry Tim. You and your friends in the African American community are living in the past.

But Zimms own defense lawyer said after the trial that the racism against blacks in the judiciary system and laws is irrefutable.

He also said that it wasnt a factor with Zimmerman personal decision making in this incident.

And that apart from his client, he would work with anyone wanting to fix those obvious inequities.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

jon_mx cannot answer the question because his talking points don't cover anything that is factual that favors Martin. He only understands facts that put Martin in a bad light.

That's why he will always be..... wrong_mx.

 

[jon_mx]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

People will always look at other people as different. There still are people who are legitimate racists (believe they are inferior and harbor disgust or hatred towards them), but it is a small number. Black youths face huge obstacles, but those who can manage to get their act together have an enormous opportunity in our society to succeed. Many of the problems they face are self-inflicted. I don't believe police are racists against blacks, hell most cops in black districts are black themselves. Blacks need to stop the cycle of poverty and crime they are stuck in. How they do it, who knows. But this victimhood mentality which exists today is obviously not working.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

I don't think it exists nearly to the level it did 20-30 years ago and I think it has dropped below the line of the African American community using it as an excuse. There is just too much information/communication/transperency in our society to allow this to happen very often anymore, regardless of intent. TVs in the courtroom, cell phone cameras, twitter, police car dashboard cameras, ect. Sorry Tim. You and your friends in the African American community are living in the past.

But Zimms own defense lawyer said after the trial that the racism against blacks in the judiciary system and laws is irrefutable.

He also said that it wasnt a factor with Zimmerman personal decision making in this incident.

And that apart from his client, he would work with anyone wanting to work to fix those obvious inequities.

I disagree. I think that's mostly past. If anything, it's more due to lack of money (ie. poor defense lawyer) than color of skin.

 

[jon_mx]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

jon_mx cannot answer the question because his talking points don't cover anything that is factual that favors Martin. He only understands facts that put Martin in a bad light.

That's why he will always be..... wrong_mx.

I answered the question numb-nuts.

 

[renesauz]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

The bolded is where the problem lies Tim. You can't call it unjust while a 20 year old black man is roughly ten times more likely to commit a murder or other violent crime as his white counterpart. While you are absolutely 100% correct that this is unfair to the innocent black youth, it is equally unfair to blame society at large for having more fear and suspicion of black youths in general. It's at best a complex problem with numerous causes requiring open discussion and acknowledgment of all the data by all sides. It is disingenuous at best to call the black murder rate the result of white racism, and it's self-inflicted blindness not to recognize that many blacks in middle class or lower neighborhoods themselves tend towards racist attitudes.

 

[squistion]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

jon_mx cannot answer the question because his talking points don't cover anything that is factual that favors Martin. He only understands facts that put Martin in a bad light.

That's why he will always be..... wrong_mx.

I answered the question numb-nuts.

No you didn't. A weird straw man argument about Hispanics raping little boys is not answering the question.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Jon, do you acknowledge that there exists, in our current society, systemic large scale instiitutionalized racism against young black males within our judicial system, and that at least part of the cause for this is lasting unjust stereotypes of blacks among those in authority, and among the population in general?

If you are not willing to accept this statement as simple truth, then there's no point in our further discussing the details of this particular case, and that also goes for anyone else here.

I don't think it exists nearly to the level it did 20-30 years ago and I think it has dropped below the line of the African American community using it as an excuse. There is just too much information/communication/transperency in our society to allow this to happen very often anymore, regardless of intent. TVs in the courtroom, cell phone cameras, twitter, police car dashboard cameras, ect. Sorry Tim. You and your friends in the African American community are living in the past.

But Zimms own defense lawyer said after the trial that the racism against blacks in the judiciary system and laws is irrefutable.

He also said that it wasnt a factor with Zimmerman personal decision making in this incident.

And that apart from his client, he would work with anyone wanting to work to fix those obvious inequities.

I disagree. I think that's mostly past. If anything, it's more due to lack of money (ie. poor defense lawyer) than color of skin.

But cops arrest 'em a greater rate then other other races who all have the same proclivity for whatever transgression transpired.

And that has nothing to do with a courtroom or lawyers... which of course is another problem. But even then, they get longer sentences.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Martin could have easily and safely entered his fathers house and everything would have been okay, and he would still be alive.

Completely wrong. Martin was just 70 yards from his house and the altercation actually happened on the very sidewalk to his door.

While Zimmerman "said" he hadn't gone that way and hadnt continued to follow, the fight happened 15 yards away from the path Zimm said he was on and upon Trayvons path to his front door. (Watch the video)

Why would Martin ever lead this guy any closer to his house where his baby brother was? Zimmerman shouldnt have cornered** him, which Trayvon obviously was (**considering his other option of allowing the follower to get close to his little brother).

Starts with "completely wrong", then proceeds to be completely wrong about every single thing he mentions. indeed

Point to exactly whats wrong?

1) The fight was on the very walkway to the Martin house.

2) Zimm "said" he hadnt gone onto that walkway until after the fight started.

2) Its about 70 yards to the door. About 15 yards from the walkway Zimm "said" he was on when talking to police.

3) His brother is in the house.

why are you so racists against Hispanics? Do you think all Hispanics want to rape little black boys?

Answer the question.

jon_mx cannot answer the question because his talking points don't cover anything that is factual that favors Martin. He only understands facts that put Martin in a bad light.

That's why he will always be..... wrong_mx.

I answered the question numb-nuts.

You answered jack and ####.

 

[Courtjester]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

Where to start with this one: The jury believed by their verdict that Z was in fear for his life, which takes care of manslaughter as well. It wasn't a matter of not understanding.

I completely agree with you that the prosecution didn't do a great job. But Tim, you need to spend some time in a courtroom like a lot of us do. DA's get handed some dogs once in a while and this case was one of them. There really wasn't a lot they could do with this one. Out of the gate, this wasn't a case where the could prove something happened, they had to make a jury guess what happened and that is a big problem for a DA. They tried to oversell the charge and hope for a fallback victory and that was probably the best case scenario for them.

The DA, like the defense, had challenges to remove jurors and both sides believed they picked a jury that benefitted their respective sides.

I also completely agree with you that there is racism in this country, but when it comes to the court side, it is more of an issue of poverty than anything else. Case in point I see often, white kid charged with Poss. of Drugs, comes in with a privately retained attorney, already has treatment set up, has the ability to pay court costs up front, probably getting some kind of deferred sentence.

Same kid comes in whether he be black/white/Hispanic with the same charge, applies for the Public Defender, has to wait for an overburdened public treatment facility to come open, is asking for a waiver of costs, probably getting a probation offer.

That's facts--not racism.

Finally, I would be interested to hear your take on why the President has avoided using the Hispanic word in any of his speeches. Yesterday, he clearly alluded to the idea that this case might have been different if the TM was white, but seems to be completely oblivious to the fact Z is Hispanic. I personally think he just doesn't want to cost his party votes by telling the truth.

 

[jon_mx]

No you didn't. A weird straw man argument about Hispanics raping little boys is not answering the question.

I find the leftwing racism against Hispanics quite humorous.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The original police recommendation. Long before this case became highly publicized, was that GZ be charged with manslaughter. That's what he should have been charged with. There was, IMO, enough evidence to convict him of this charge had the prosecution practiced a strategy like the one Ramsey Hunt proposed in this thread or the one Jeffrey Toobin proposed on CNN.

Then it seems like you of all people should be ticked off at the racially-charged mob that eventually twisted enough arms to get a laughable overcharge.

I am. If you're talking about Al Sharpton, Ben Crump and their crowd, I can't stand them. They screwed this case up early on. However, blame also has to go to the Sanford authorities, who refused to press charges when there was clearly enough evidence to do so.And Sharpton and Crump and the rest are right about the essence of this case: it has everything to do with race.

It seems like an acquittal would indicate there clearly wasn't enough evidence to do so

An acquittal largely based on murder 2, in which the jury demonstrated they didn't understand manslaughter, and which the prosecution screwed up from day 1. Also a jury dominated by a woman who is pro-gun and largely sympathetic to Zimmerman and who apparently convinced everyone else. This woman never should have been on the jury- her mind was made up before the trial started.

Where to start with this one: The jury believed by their verdict that Z was in fear for his life, which takes care of manslaughter as well. It wasn't a matter of not understanding.

I completely agree with you that the prosecution didn't do a great job. But Tim, you need to spend some time in a courtroom like a lot of us do. DA's get handed some dogs once in a while and this case was one of them. There really wasn't a lot they could do with this one. Out of the gate, this wasn't a case where the could prove something happened, they had to make a jury guess what happened and that is a big problem for a DA. They tried to oversell the charge and hope for a fallback victory and that was probably the best case scenario for them.

The DA, like the defense, had challenges to remove jurors and both sides believed they picked a jury that benefitted their respective sides.

I also completely agree with you that there is racism in this country, but when it comes to the court side, it is more of an issue of poverty than anything else. Case in point I see often, white kid charged with Poss. of Drugs, comes in with a privately retained attorney, already has treatment set up, has the ability to pay court costs up front, probably getting some kind of deferred sentence.

Same kid comes in whether he be black/white/Hispanic with the same charge, applies for the Public Defender, has to wait for an overburdened public treatment facility to come open, is asking for a waiver of costs, probably getting a probation offer.

That's facts--not racism.

Finally, I would be interested to hear your take on why the President has avoided using the Hispanic word in any of his speeches. Yesterday, he clearly alluded to the idea that this case might have been different if the TM was white, but seems to be completely oblivious to the fact Z is Hispanic. I personally think he just doesn't want to cost his party votes by telling the truth.

Very good post. One of my high school classmates is an asst. DA in Jacksonville and has shared very similar observations.

Interesting point on Obama. Your hunch is probably right.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

No you didn't. A weird straw man argument about Hispanics raping little boys is not answering the question.

I find the leftwing racism against Hispanics quite humorous.

It's when you type throwaway comments like the above that you are at your least compelling. And that is saying something.

 

[squistion]

No you didn't. A weird straw man argument about Hispanics raping little boys is not answering the question.

I find the leftwing racism against Hispanics quite humorous.

Yes and that's why Latinos voted 71% for Obama in the last election, it was all that left wing racism directed against them by democrats, liberals and progressives.

 

[renesauz]

Where to start with this one: The jury believed by their verdict that Z was in fear for his life, which takes care of manslaughter as well. It wasn't a matter of not understanding.


I completely agree with you that the prosecution didn't do a great job. But Tim, you need to spend some time in a courtroom like a lot of us do. DA's get handed some dogs once in a while and this case was one of them. There really wasn't a lot they could do with this one. Out of the gate, this wasn't a case where the could prove something happened, they had to make a jury guess what happened and that is a big problem for a DA. They tried to oversell the charge and hope for a fallback victory and that was probably the best case scenario for them.

The DA, like the defense, had challenges to remove jurors and both sides believed they picked a jury that benefitted their respective sides.

I also completely agree with you that there is racism in this country, but when it comes to the court side, it is more of an issue of poverty than anything else. Case in point I see often, white kid charged with Poss. of Drugs, comes in with a privately retained attorney, already has treatment set up, has the ability to pay court costs up front, probably getting some kind of deferred sentence.

Same kid comes in whether he be black/white/Hispanic with the same charge, applies for the Public Defender, has to wait for an overburdened public treatment facility to come open, is asking for a waiver of costs, probably getting a probation offer.

That's facts--not racism.

Finally, I would be interested to hear your take on why the President has avoided using the Hispanic word in any of his speeches. Yesterday, he clearly alluded to the idea that this case might have been different if the TM was white, but seems to be completely oblivious to the fact Z is Hispanic. I personally think he just doesn't want to cost his party votes by telling the truth.

Great post, especially the bolded. There are a lot of folks that are bound and determined to see racism everywhere, and simply can't fathom or consider other reasons for apparent racial disparities. The funny thing is, those same folks are the ones consistently stating that SES factors are the reason for the disparities in crime, yet don't seem to realize that SES is a much more significant factor in the courtroom than race.