Justice for Trayvon [Protest Rally in Grand Circus Park]

[EastsideAl]

How does that change his reaction? It seems to be the reaction of a person who has told the truth, as it would to any reasonable person.

You said that the story was according to Zimmerman's "testimony," but, in fact, Zimmerman never testified under oath. If he had done so, his statements and the description he gave of the incident would have been open to cross-examination and challenge by the defense. Since that did not happen [[as is quite common in criminal cases), Zimmerman's accounting of events remains largely unchallenged, which is why I, and many others, are unwilling to accept it as a gospel account of what happened that night.

[Detroitnerd]

You said that the story was according to Zimmerman's "testimony," but, in fact, Zimmerman never testified under oath. If he had done so, his statements and the description he gave of the incident would have been open to cross-examination and challenge by the defense. Since that did not happen [[as is quite common in criminal cases), Zimmerman's accounting of events remains largely unchallenged, which is why I, and many others, are unwilling to accept it as a gospel account of what happened that night.

This is a very fine point. Zimmerman's statement dovetails very neatly with what was found. Zimmerman's statement shows a person making a bunch of very poor choices that resulted in him being attacked and, finally, defending himself. The evidence doesn't disprove his statement. So the conclusion I come to is that this moron didn't commit murder.

I generally agree with you, Al, and find you to be a thoughtful and intelligent contributor to this forum. I think you are too biased on this one. And I don't blame you. People often see what they want to see. But when somebody's statement aligns with the evidence, maybe that's why it's given such credence.

[EastsideAl]

peaceful protest is a right of the people, and often is the catalyst to bring about real change.

Fair-minded citizens wanting to protest the system does not necessarily equal mob mentality.

I couldn't agree more with these statements.

People protesting bad and unfair laws, unfair and biased applications and uses of the law, and court decisions arising from bad laws, biased application of the law, or just plain bias of the courts and the society around them, has been an inherent and vital catalyst in the advancement of equality and justice in our country.

[Downriviera]

again, and for the last time... the ONLY one attesting that Martin "viciously attacked" Zimmerman, is ZIMMERMAN.

Not so...the investigating officers are attesting this after evaluating all the evidence. But lets assume Zimmerman confronted Martin and threw the first punch. No evidence of any blows on Martin of this other than the bullet hole, so lets say he missed or Martin blocked the punch. At some point early on Zimmermans nose was broken. Have any of you ever had your nose broken? I have, 4 times. Twice in hockey fights, once by a hockey puck, and once after being attacked by 3 teenagers which I mentioned earlier. The first thing that happens is you can not see. Your eyes are watering so bad you have no sight. You are completely dazed and dizzy and you fall down very quickly. You still can't see and sounds are garbled. You are basically incapacitated for several minutes. So at this point Zimmerman is no match. Creepy cracker threat is over. But now we have the head injuries to Zimmerman. So instead of leaving the scene when Zimmerman is down, Martin moves in for the kill, slamming his head on the sidewalk. The human skull can only take so much of this before you expire. If Zimmerman does not have a gun, theres a good chance he's dead. Sure, this can be spun many other ways. But the injuries to Zimmerman are indisputable facts.

One other thing is bothering me about this. I'm not a parent so I need to hear from parents about this. If your 17 year old son is suspended from school and staying with you in a high crime area, what is he doing out after dark? I was no angel in my teens, and I got suspended from school. After my father strapped my ass so much I couldn't sit for 2 days, I was confined to the house for a month. No TV, no games, no phone calls, nothing. Sat in my room for a whole month.

[Detroitnerd]

It's very easy to have a deep and thoughtful discussion, in a calm and measured manner, when you are not part of the ethnic group being stopped and frisked, being stereotyped, or on the receiving end of death by cop. The conversation doesn't have the same relaxed, academic tone when you are living it.

This is not by any means meant to condone any type of rioting, but a peaceful protest is a right of the people, and often is the catalyst to bring about real change.

Not every law should be a law. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. And every law needs to be applied equally across the board, but is not -- just look at the case of Marissa Alexander, a black woman in Florida who fired two warning shots in self-defense, with neither bullet hitting anyone. She's currently serving 20 years for that crime.

Fair-minded citizens wanting to protest the system does not necessarily equal mob mentality.

DL, I think you are coming to my statement with your own set of prejudices about who I am, what I represent, what I want, and what's behind my words. It is possible to have deep and thoughtful discussions and learn from each other. I'll just say one thing about this week's group action, direct action and protest culture: This is the wrong case to protest. Usually, social equality groups select their battles carefully and pursue them in the courts and in the street as part of a larger campaign. Nobody but the MSM picked this one. And people's passions are being played and very few people are discussing it based on any facts, testimony, evidence or knowledge of the actual case.

Anyway, if it all boils down to me not being black enough to have that conversation, I would just like to know who the fuck is supposed to have that conversation then? Louis Farrakhan and James Brown?

[Downtown Lady]

Zimmerman's statement shows a person making a bunch of very poor choices that resulted in him being attacked.

Imagine that. According to Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin made a bunch of very poor choices that caused himself to get attacked.

[Ltdave]

I'll leave my own educational and occupational background out of this and just say that, insofar as I know, being inarticulate is not a crime. Nor does it necessarily mean that one is telling more or less truth than someone else.

i whole-heartedly agree with you. but Rachel Jeantel should have been coached or at least given a modicum of direction of how to behave on the stand. perjury doesnt help any case ever. none of her testimony HELPED the prosecution at all...

also, NOTHING George Zimmerman did was a crime either...

[Detroitnerd]

Imagine that. According to Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin made a bunch of very poor choices that caused himself to get attacked.

According to the statements, testimony and evidence, I think both of them made bad decisions. Anybody can make bad decisions.

The media, however, in blowing this up into an almost-fact-free brouhaha, were criminal.

[EastsideAl]

This is a very fine point. Zimmerman's statement dovetails very neatly with what was found. Zimmerman's statement shows a person making a bunch of very poor choices that resulted in him being attacked and, finally, defending himself. The evidence doesn't disprove his statement. So the conclusion I come to is that this moron didn't commit murder.

I generally agree with you, Al, and find you to be a thoughtful and intelligent contributor to this forum. I think you are too biased on this one. And I don't blame you. People often see what they want to see. But when somebody's statement aligns with the evidence, maybe that's why it's given such credence.

The evidence, and the statements of everyone involved also show clearly that Zimmerman wholly initiated the series of actions that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death. This may not matter much under current Florida law or under the common applications of that law, but any under any reasonable system of laws [[like that that has prevailed in most of this country for most of its history) the person who initiates an action is at least partially culpable for the series of events that follows that action. That's why someone who, say, creates a panic in a crowded place is responsible if other people then get trampled in the panic. This has usually been especially true if there is a power or responsibility imbalance between the 2 people involved, like, say, one is armed or one is an adult and the other one isn't.

But even if one is to accept Florida's laws and their interpretation of self-defense, I ask again, what the hell happened to Trayvon Martin's right to defend himself?

Why is an armed adult who chases an unarmed person magically given that right, but an unarmed teenager committing no crime who is being pursued by an armed adult is not? Having lived in this country for nearly 60 years now, I can only see one rational explanation for that imbalance, and it is a truly ugly one that I have seen over and over again.

My objection is not based on wishful thinking, but on what actually happened and the legal, historical, and moral implications of both those actions and the end result.

[Downtown Lady]

DL, I think you are coming to my statement with your own set of prejudices about who I am, what I represent, what I want, and what's behind my words. It is possible to have deep and thoughtful discussions and learn from each other. I'll just say one thing about this week's group action, direct action and protest culture: This is the wrong case to protest. Usually, social equality groups select their battles carefully and pursue them in the courts and in the street as part of a larger campaign. Nobody but the MSM picked this one. And people's passions are being played and very few people are discussing it based on any facts, testimony, evidence or knowledge of the actual case.

Anyway, if it all boils down to me not being black enough to have that conversation, I would just like to know who the fuck is supposed to have that conversation then? Louis Farrakhan and James Brown?

WHAT? Wow, that is a lot that you just said there. I don't have any prejudices about who you are or what you represent. This doesn't have anything to do with you. Who said anything at all [[or implied any such thing) about you "not being black enough"? Where in the world did that come from? I'm not black either.

I understand the need for discussion, and it being done in an academic way, with a protest case strategically chosen by a social equality group sounds lovely. But in the real world where people are fed up with unequal treatment they have been receiving for centuries, I don't think things always unfold in a neatly-planned way.

And while the mainstream media has certainly done its share of fanning the flames, to say "nobody but the MSM picked this one" is a statement that shows a complete naivete to what real people in the real world are feeling. People are tired of being profiled. People are tired of having laws unequally applied. This case is just a tipping point -- and a tipping point usually happens when it happens, and not at some carefully-planned time.

[Detroitnerd]

What happened to Martin's right to defend himself against what? What was the illegal act that required defending himself against? What I see is two cocky and not-too-intelligent individuals who face off because of their poor decisions. Zimmerman had not broken the law. Martin had not broken the law. Based on what I have seen and heard, I believe that no laws were broken until the moment Martin decided to punch Zimmerman. And kept on punching Zimmerman. And was slamming Zimmerman's head against the ground.

If a 6-foot-tall person were banging my friend's head against the ground, blood running into his mouth and choking him, barely able to see, about to lose consciousness, no matter what conducted to that event, I would say my friend had a right to defend himself.

No matter how opposed you are to racism, you can't use that opposition to racism to make GZ judged guilty of something he wasn't -- and, I believe, shouldn't have been.

[Downtown Lady]

What happened to Martin's right to defend himself against what?

The man with the gun pursuing him?

[Detroitnerd]

WHAT? Wow, that is a lot that you just said there. I don't have any prejudices about who you are or what you represent. This doesn't have anything to do with you. Who said anything at all [[or implied any such thing) about you "not being black enough"? Where in the world did that come from? I'm not black either.

I don't know, just something I thought I sensed in your response. If you knew me, really knew me, you might even find it amusing that you're trying to explain to me how there is a need for protest and a time and place for thoughtful discussion.

I understand the need for discussion, and it being done in an academic way, with a protest case strategically chosen by a social equality group sounds lovely. But in the real world where people are fed up with unequal treatment they have been receiving for centuries, I don't think things always unfold in a neatly-planned way.

The shame is that there have been so many cases where actual racists, wearing blue, vested with the power of the state, very obviously kill passive people of color, and the media doesn't show those trials in any detail. Instead of showing you those trials, they turn this trial into a SHOW. And so many people think they know what it's all about and they don't. Uninformed mobs are not my idea of how we should move this conversation forward.

And while the mainstream media has certainly done its share of fanning the flames, to say "nobody but the MSM picked this one" is a statement that shows a complete naivete to what real people in the real world are feeling. People are tired of being profiled. People are tired of having laws unequally applied. This case is just a tipping point -- and a tipping point usually happens when it happens, and not at some carefully-planned time.

And what are we to make of these cries of "Justice for Trayvon." Trayvon is so far beyond justice right now. What they really are is protests for blood. For George Zimmerman's blood. For vengeance. And that's terrifying and awful, and the mainstream media is largely to blame.

[Downriviera]

The evidence, and the statements of everyone involved also show clearly that Zimmerman wholly initiated the series of actions that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death.

Were hearing this alot. I feel the crime in the neighborhood initiated the series of actions. Adult parents letting their kids run amok robbing homes, terrifying young mothers. And the people who won't turn them in, won't snitch. If there is no crime in the neighborhood, there is no George Zimmerman.

[Detroitnerd]

The man with the gun pursuing him?

It sounds very alarming when you put it like that. But was the gun drawn? Was he threatening Martin? Was he about to attack Martin in any way? Where was the crime that Martin defended himself against? Not saying Zimmerman made good decisions, but he didn't break the law.

[EastsideAl]

The evidence, and the statements of everyone involved also show clearly that Zimmerman wholly initiated the series of actions that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death.

Were hearing this alot. I feel the crime in the neighborhood initiated the series of actions. Adult parents letting their kids run amok robbing homes, terrifying youg mothers. And the people who won't turn them in, won't snitch. If there is no crime in the neighborhood, there is no George Zimmerman.

But Trayvon Martin didn't commit those crimes. So, unless you're willing to assign collective guilt to all young black males for those crimes [[which it sure sounds like you are), we're right back where we started from, with George Zimmerman following and eventually killing someone who was committing no crime.

[bailey]

It sounds very alarming when you put it like that. But was the gun drawn? Was he threatening Martin? Was he about to attack Martin in any way? Where was the crime that Martin defended himself against?

All good questions that should be asked of Martin about how the events transpired...oh wait, he's dead.

[Detroitnerd]

Well, if nobody should be acquitted due to lack of evidence to convict ... I'll let you be the one to call Angela Davis and tell her to report to prison, OK?

I'm not ready to trash the whole system of reasonable doubt and jurisprudence because a guy was acquitted for shooting in self-defense when some 6-foot-tall "child" was banging his head into the concrete.

[Downriviera]

But Trayvon Martin didn't commit those crimes. So, unless you're willing to assign collective guilt to all young black males for those crimes [[which it sure sounds like you are), we're right back where we started from, with George Zimmerman following and eventually killing someone who was committing no crime.

And you're sure of this? Martin was previously found by police with a breakin too. But lets say he never committed any previous crimes. He for sure committed a crime when he punched Zimmerman in the face. If Zimmerman had no injuries and Martin is dead, then I'm with you. But that is clearly not the case here. I never said anything about young black males committing the crimes in that neighborhood. From the interviews of residents in that neighborhood, its seems mixed. I don't know who is committing the crimes there. They interviewed a black man from the neighborhood who spoke highly of Zimmerman, good salt of the earth guy, give you the shirt off his back.

[bailey]

]Well, if nobody should be acquitted due to lack of evidence to convict ... I'll let you be the one to call Angela Davis and tell her to report to prison, OK?

did i ever say any such thing? Nope. not once. the ONLY thing I've said is that Z's account of what happened is the ONLY account. nothing he said has been refuted because the only one to refute it is the dead guy.

I'm not ready to trash the whole system of reasonable doubt and jurisprudence because a guy was acquitted for shooting in self-defense when some 6-foot-tall "child" was banging his head into the concrete.

Neither am I.

but that doesn't mean we take Zimmerman's story to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt either.

[Detroitnerd]

did i ever say any such thing? Nope. not once. the ONLY thing I've said is that Z's account of what happened is the ONLY account. nothing he said has been refuted because the only one to refute it is the dead guy.

Huh? I wasn't talking to you. Just a general comment about the value of jurisprudence and reasonable doubt. If some people go free who should have done some time, that's a court system that errs on the right side, in my humble opinion.

Neither am I.

but that doesn't mean we take Zimmerman's story to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt either.

I find his story believable. Of course, in order to believe his story, you have to accept that he sounds like a dumbass ...

In fact, that's why it rings of truth. Who would make up such unflattering lies about himself?

[Downriviera]

Neither am I. but that doesn't mean we take Zimerman's story to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt either.

Clearly you don't believe Zimmerman's story, though verified by police investigators. Why?

[EastsideAl]

But the plain truth remains: if Zimmerman - under the law at least a responsible adult - never gets out of his car, as he was told not to, there is no dead child. Zimmerman initiated the action that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death by his hand [[or, more to the point, his gun).

And having worked on neighborhood watch here in Detroit - certainly a more dangerous and crime-filled place that Sanford Fla [[and we were most definitely not armed) - I can't begin to tell you how many rules of a good, effective neighborhood watch self-appointed vigilante "watchman" Zimmerman broke before his incident even started. Including rule #1: don't get out of the car!

[Detroitnerd]

But the plain truth remains: if Zimmerman - under the law at least a responsible adult - never gets out of his car, as he was told not to, there is no dead child. Zimmerman initiated the action that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death by his hand [[or, more to the point, his gun).

And having worked on neighborhood watch here in Detroit - certainly a more dangerous and crime-filled place that Sanford Fla [[and we were most definitely not armed) - I can't begin to tell you how many rules of a good, effective neighborhood watch self-appointed vigilante "watchman" Zimmerman broke before his incident even started. Including rule #1: don't get out of the car!

Breaking the law and being a dumbass are not the same thing. If Zimmerman were on trial for "being a dumbass," the jury would likely have convicted him with twenty minutes' deliberation...

[Downriviera]

But the plain truth remains: if Zimmerman - under the law at least a responsible adult - never gets out of his car, as he was told not to, there is no dead child. Zimmerman initiated the action that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death by his hand [[or, more to the point, his gun).

And having worked on neighborhood watch here in Detroit - certainly a more dangerous and crime-filled place that Sanford Fla [[and we were most definitely not armed) - I can't begin to tell you how many rules of a good, effective neighborhood watch self-appointed vigilante "watchman" Zimmerman broke before his incident even started. Including rule #1: don't get out of the car!

I applaud you for working neighborhood watch. Its a dangerous job. I stated early on that Zimmerman should not have gotten out of his car. However, the 911 operator never told him to not get out of his car. The operator asked him for more information as to Martin's movements. It wasn't till Zimmerman asked the operator if he should follow him further that the operator stated "We don't need you to do that". I wish there was a law that states a neighborhood watch person cannot leave their car or they get 2 years in prison. Maybe that would appease some. I think the outrage is that he got off scott free for being stupid. But 2 wrongs don't make a right. Martin should not have bashed his face in and pounded his head into the pavement. Again, tragic event where the root cause was crime.