Trayvon and the media
Options
Replies
-
Why didn’t he have blood on him from shooting Trayvon in the chest? How far away was that kid when he shot him? If you shoot someone or an animal at close range you would be a bloody mess and Zimmerman was most certainly not a bloody mess and Zimmerman had not changed his clothes when he had went to the police station.
Incorrect. When you get shot the blood usually leaves the body in the outward direction - not from the initial point of insertion.
There would have been some splatter on him, especially if Trayvon was on top of him. This needs to go to court!0 -
Possibilities:
1.) Trayvon was innocent.
2.) George Zimmerman is innocent and was defending himself.
3.) Trayvon was not innocent and attacked Zimmerman.
4.) George Zimmerman was not innocent and was not defending himself.
5.) I'm a dragon rawr...
Fact:
We don't know all of the information regarding this case (since the media has done such a poor job with distributing it), so debating this topic based upon what you've seen on television or have heard from your friend(s) is ultimately pointless given the fact that we can't be don't have all of the stringent details.
And yet you joined in with information you received from the media. If you are smart enough to be discerning and critical about second hand information you receive from the media and whomever else, why can't everyone else? Simply because they form a different opinion from you, doesn't mean they have no critical thinking skills. (your opinion being that you don't have enough information to draw a conclusion)
I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never, but there is enough question about the situation for a probable cause arrest. And that is what I hear everyone asking for, an arrest and vetting of the evidence and the accounts using the judicial system. Surely you have no objection to that?
In any case, I don't come from the school that blames the media for thus and that. I think I have pretty good critical thinking skills and know how to seek out information. And I truly believe if the media did not get involved by reporting a news story that there wouldn't be an investigation going on now, the Sanford police had pretty much closed the case and was not providing any information to the parents. They are the ones that did a poor job. And they are the ones reporting and leaking piecemeal information. The media didn't shoot Trayvon, the media did not tell the parents that they should feel that justice wasn't served, etc, etc, etc.
And at the point that there is enough information to debate I am sure you, the proper debate authority, will let us know after you have had a conference with the Sanford police department, the parents on both sides, and the state attorney. Because surely you won't be getting any information from media or friends/acquaintances.
I am being a bit snarky, but it seemed like the best approach. Seriously though, I think the debate is healthy. I think we all should examine our core beliefs and have them challenged from time to time. I also take no issue with questioning our justice system to ensure that there is equity. Question: do you feel that there exists enough probable cause for an arrest and thorough investigation?0 -
Possibilities:
1.) Trayvon was innocent.
2.) George Zimmerman is innocent and was defending himself.
3.) Trayvon was not innocent and attacked Zimmerman.
4.) George Zimmerman was not innocent and was not defending himself.
5.) I'm a dragon rawr...
Fact:
We don't know all of the information regarding this case (since the media has done such a poor job with distributing it), so debating this topic based upon what you've seen on television or have heard from your friend(s) is ultimately pointless given the fact that we can't be don't have all of the stringent details.
And yet you joined in with information you received from the media. If you are smart enough to be discerning and critical about second hand information you receive from the media and whomever else, why can't everyone else? Simply because they form a different opinion from you, doesn't mean they have no critical thinking skills. (your opinion being that you don't have enough information to draw a conclusion)
I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never, but there is enough question about the situation for a probable cause arrest. And that is what I hear everyone asking for, an arrest and vetting of the evidence and the accounts using the judicial system. Surely you have no objection to that?
In any case, I don't come from the school that blames the media for thus and that. I think I have pretty good critical thinking skills and know how to seek out information. And I truly believe if the media did not get involved by reporting a news story that there wouldn't be an investigation going on now, the Sanford police had pretty much closed the case and was not providing any information to the parents. They are the ones that did a poor job. And they are the ones reporting and leaking piecemeal information. The media didn't shoot Trayvon, the media did not tell the parents that they should feel that justice wasn't served, etc, etc, etc.
And at the point that there is enough information to debate I am sure you, the proper debate authority, will let us know after you have had a conference with the Sanford police department, the parents on both sides, and the state attorney. Because surely you won't be getting any information from media or friends/acquaintances.
I am being a bit snarky, but it seemed like the best approach. Seriously though, I think the debate is healthy. I think we all should examine our core beliefs and have them challenged from time to time. I also take no issue with questioning our justice system to ensure that there is equity. Question: do you feel that there exists enough probable cause for an arrest and thorough investigation?
>"I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never..."
That's enough said. If we don't know each and every detail about the case, why on Earth would we attempt to draw logical conclusions? There are a numerous amount of possibilities that could have arisen on the night with Trayvon and Zimmerman, but until we know everything, what's the point of debating it if information can be released in the next hour contradicting everyone's thoughts about the case?0 -
About the 911 call - nothing for sure since there was no audio of Martin to compare, but:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/02/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html"There's a huge chance that this is not Zimmerman's voice," said Primeau, a longtime audio engineer who is listed as an expert in recorded evidence by the American College of Forensic Examiners International. "As a matter of fact, after 28 years of doing this, I would put my reputation on the line and say this is not George Zimmerman screaming."
Owen, a forensic audio analyst who is also chairman emeritus of the American Board of Recorded Evidence, said he also does not believe the screams come from Zimmerman.
Software frequently used to analyze voices in legal cases shows a 48% likelihood that the voice is Zimmerman's. At least 60% is necessary to feel confident that two samples are from the same source, he said Monday on CNN. That means it's unlikely the screams came from Zimmerman, Owen said.
Both experts stressed they cannot say who was screaming. They have no samples of Martin's voice.0 -
No, shooting someone does not automatically make you a cold blooded murderer. I know a few thousand veterans that would agree with that statement so be very cautious of your broad sweeping generalizations. Neither does the age of the victim.
Im glad you are willing to accept grainy security video from 4-6 hours after the injuries occurred as solid proof.
Please quote the racists comments, with your brief explanation of why you feel that it is discriminatory towards someone of another race, so that I can report them to a mod.
Dont make accusations you cant corroborate
I know a few thousand veterans myself...I'm one of them. I don't recall ever shooting unarmed teenagers in Iraq. If we did, we would be subject to a military court martial.
That's not what I said...I said "shooting someone does not automatically make you a cold blooded murderer."0 -
Anyone who looks at this case and is supporting the murderer over the dead teenager is a racist.
I didn't vote for Obama I was already considered a racist... thanks though. *insert stereotype about blonde women*
I know this wasn't in response to me, but I don't get it. Surely you are not calling yourself a racist? And I didn't see anyone mention Obama, or did I miss it? A little confused...
But I would be curious to know why she said that or have her elaborate what she meant. I'd like to understand her point of view.
Im just not going to fight against it... Call me what you want but I stand by everything I said. If I'm a racist then I'm a racist. Sign me up and make me the president of Racists.
During the election I was called a racist because I didn't want to vote for Obama. I must be a racist because I dont agree with ultra liberal socialists who l want to destroy the moral fabric of our society. Again Im a racist because I wish to stand up for the most basic tenant of our justice system. Innocent until proven guilty. But because He was a kid (old enough to enlist in the military) and he had recently made a purchase of skittles and some Arizona sweet tea Oh and nothing can ever happen on accident its all pre-planned. Than I'm a racist.0 -
And yes, what did happen to innocent until proven guilty? Oh...that's right...you get shot by the wannabe-watchdog for buying some Skittles and Arizona iced tea. Clearly these are the people who should be administering justice to those of us who like to wear hooded sweatshirts.
Really?! Zimmerman didn't shoot Trayvon because he bought Skittles and Arizona iced tea.
I know that sarcasm isn't always crystal clear over the Internet...but really? Reeeeeeaaaaaaallllly?0 -
Possibilities:
1.) Trayvon was innocent.
2.) George Zimmerman is innocent and was defending himself.
3.) Trayvon was not innocent and attacked Zimmerman.
4.) George Zimmerman was not innocent and was not defending himself.
5.) I'm a dragon rawr...
Fact:
We don't know all of the information regarding this case (since the media has done such a poor job with distributing it), so debating this topic based upon what you've seen on television or have heard from your friend(s) is ultimately pointless given the fact that we can't be don't have all of the stringent details.
And yet you joined in with information you received from the media. If you are smart enough to be discerning and critical about second hand information you receive from the media and whomever else, why can't everyone else? Simply because they form a different opinion from you, doesn't mean they have no critical thinking skills. (your opinion being that you don't have enough information to draw a conclusion)
I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never, but there is enough question about the situation for a probable cause arrest. And that is what I hear everyone asking for, an arrest and vetting of the evidence and the accounts using the judicial system. Surely you have no objection to that?
In any case, I don't come from the school that blames the media for thus and that. I think I have pretty good critical thinking skills and know how to seek out information. And I truly believe if the media did not get involved by reporting a news story that there wouldn't be an investigation going on now, the Sanford police had pretty much closed the case and was not providing any information to the parents. They are the ones that did a poor job. And they are the ones reporting and leaking piecemeal information. The media didn't shoot Trayvon, the media did not tell the parents that they should feel that justice wasn't served, etc, etc, etc.
And at the point that there is enough information to debate I am sure you, the proper debate authority, will let us know after you have had a conference with the Sanford police department, the parents on both sides, and the state attorney. Because surely you won't be getting any information from media or friends/acquaintances.
I am being a bit snarky, but it seemed like the best approach. Seriously though, I think the debate is healthy. I think we all should examine our core beliefs and have them challenged from time to time. I also take no issue with questioning our justice system to ensure that there is equity. Question: do you feel that there exists enough probable cause for an arrest and thorough investigation?
>"I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never..."
That's enough said. If we don't know each and every detail about the case, why on Earth would we attempt to draw logical conclusions? There are a numerous amount of possibilities that could have arisen on the night with Trayvon and Zimmerman, but until we know everything, what's the point of debating it if information can be released in the next hour contradicting everyone's thoughts about the case?
The short answer is......................this is the debate club, it was created for any and all debates as long as people are enjoying themselves. We didn't know all the details about the Casey Anthony case but we still enjoyed debating and discussing it with each other, and when updates came in, discussion points changed. Nothing wrong with a lively debate.0 -
Anyone who looks at this case and is supporting the murderer over the dead teenager is a racist.
I didn't vote for Obama I was already considered a racist... thanks though. *insert stereotype about blonde women*
I know this wasn't in response to me, but I don't get it. Surely you are not calling yourself a racist? And I didn't see anyone mention Obama, or did I miss it? A little confused...
But I would be curious to know why she said that or have her elaborate what she meant. I'd like to understand her point of view.
Im just not going to fight against it... Call me what you want but I stand by everything I said. If I'm a racist then I'm a racist. Sign me up and make me the president of Racists.
During the election I was called a racist because I didn't want to vote for Obama. I must be a racist because I dont agree with ultra liberal socialists who l want to destroy the moral fabric of our society. Again Im a racist because I wish to stand up for the most basic tenant of our justice system. Innocent until proven guilty. But because He was a kid (old enough to enlist in the military) and he had recently made a purchase of skittles and some Arizona sweet tea Oh and nothing can ever happen on accident its all pre-planned. Than I'm a racist.
Ohhhkkkaaaaayyyy..... :ohwell: This seems a little bit more personal for you than just this case. Listen, if you are a racist, want to be a racist, hey, it's a free country. Even if you are, I would still debate with you. :smooched: I think I missed where anyone called you a racist, then there is the whole Obama thing. I don't know if you know anyone in this thread, but I don't know you. Heck even your picture could be a fake. All anyone will know is what you tell them on here directly and through your interaction with others. Personally I wouldn't want to claim a description like that of myself. Maybe you should start a new topic to discuss those things, I would join you on there.
Maybe I'll start one.
Now as far as the case is concerned, I think the problem, again, is that Zimmerman's word was enough for the police. Had it not been for all of that attention and protest, there would be no special prosecutor looking into it. The justice system is not always fair, that is why it is important to ask questions and investigate when there is an appearance of inpropriety of any sorts. We need to have confidence in the justice system, at least I do, even if the outcome is not what I expect. If it appears to be fair, I can accept it. Innocent until proven guilty? In order for him to be proven "guilty", there has to be an arrest, charges, a trial or a plea. If there is nothing there, then the charges can be dropped. Even people who accidentally kill others get arrested and charged with something like negligent manslaughter. Most aren't trying to to convict him, they are trying to say, hey, something is fishy! Can we agree that there is enough question and conflict with the details of the case that an arrest and a proper investigation is warranted?
Oh, and not that it makes a difference, but his birthday was February 5th, he was less than a month into his 17th year of life. Way closer to 16 than 18. But he could have been the same age as Zimmerman, doesn't make much difference to me.0 -
Possibilities:
1.) Trayvon was innocent.
2.) George Zimmerman is innocent and was defending himself.
3.) Trayvon was not innocent and attacked Zimmerman.
4.) George Zimmerman was not innocent and was not defending himself.
5.) I'm a dragon rawr...
Fact:
We don't know all of the information regarding this case (since the media has done such a poor job with distributing it), so debating this topic based upon what you've seen on television or have heard from your friend(s) is ultimately pointless given the fact that we can't be don't have all of the stringent details.
And yet you joined in with information you received from the media. If you are smart enough to be discerning and critical about second hand information you receive from the media and whomever else, why can't everyone else? Simply because they form a different opinion from you, doesn't mean they have no critical thinking skills. (your opinion being that you don't have enough information to draw a conclusion)
I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never, but there is enough question about the situation for a probable cause arrest. And that is what I hear everyone asking for, an arrest and vetting of the evidence and the accounts using the judicial system. Surely you have no objection to that?
In any case, I don't come from the school that blames the media for thus and that. I think I have pretty good critical thinking skills and know how to seek out information. And I truly believe if the media did not get involved by reporting a news story that there wouldn't be an investigation going on now, the Sanford police had pretty much closed the case and was not providing any information to the parents. They are the ones that did a poor job. And they are the ones reporting and leaking piecemeal information. The media didn't shoot Trayvon, the media did not tell the parents that they should feel that justice wasn't served, etc, etc, etc.
And at the point that there is enough information to debate I am sure you, the proper debate authority, will let us know after you have had a conference with the Sanford police department, the parents on both sides, and the state attorney. Because surely you won't be getting any information from media or friends/acquaintances.
I am being a bit snarky, but it seemed like the best approach. Seriously though, I think the debate is healthy. I think we all should examine our core beliefs and have them challenged from time to time. I also take no issue with questioning our justice system to ensure that there is equity. Question: do you feel that there exists enough probable cause for an arrest and thorough investigation?
>"I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never..."
That's enough said. If we don't know each and every detail about the case, why on Earth would we attempt to draw logical conclusions? There are a numerous amount of possibilities that could have arisen on the night with Trayvon and Zimmerman, but until we know everything, what's the point of debating it if information can be released in the next hour contradicting everyone's thoughts about the case?
The short answer is......................this is the debate club, it was created for any and all debates as long as people are enjoying themselves. We didn't know all the details about the Casey Anthony case but we still enjoyed debating and discussing it with each other, and when updates came in, discussion points changed. Nothing wrong with a lively debate.
Technically, nothing "wrong", but I think it does make people look foolish to debate the details of a case when they don't know the facts--whether it's this one, Casey Anthony, whatever.0 -
Possibilities:
1.) Trayvon was innocent.
2.) George Zimmerman is innocent and was defending himself.
3.) Trayvon was not innocent and attacked Zimmerman.
4.) George Zimmerman was not innocent and was not defending himself.
5.) I'm a dragon rawr...
Fact:
We don't know all of the information regarding this case (since the media has done such a poor job with distributing it), so debating this topic based upon what you've seen on television or have heard from your friend(s) is ultimately pointless given the fact that we can't be don't have all of the stringent details.
And yet you joined in with information you received from the media. If you are smart enough to be discerning and critical about second hand information you receive from the media and whomever else, why can't everyone else? Simply because they form a different opinion from you, doesn't mean they have no critical thinking skills. (your opinion being that you don't have enough information to draw a conclusion)
I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never, but there is enough question about the situation for a probable cause arrest. And that is what I hear everyone asking for, an arrest and vetting of the evidence and the accounts using the judicial system. Surely you have no objection to that?
In any case, I don't come from the school that blames the media for thus and that. I think I have pretty good critical thinking skills and know how to seek out information. And I truly believe if the media did not get involved by reporting a news story that there wouldn't be an investigation going on now, the Sanford police had pretty much closed the case and was not providing any information to the parents. They are the ones that did a poor job. And they are the ones reporting and leaking piecemeal information. The media didn't shoot Trayvon, the media did not tell the parents that they should feel that justice wasn't served, etc, etc, etc.
And at the point that there is enough information to debate I am sure you, the proper debate authority, will let us know after you have had a conference with the Sanford police department, the parents on both sides, and the state attorney. Because surely you won't be getting any information from media or friends/acquaintances.
I am being a bit snarky, but it seemed like the best approach. Seriously though, I think the debate is healthy. I think we all should examine our core beliefs and have them challenged from time to time. I also take no issue with questioning our justice system to ensure that there is equity. Question: do you feel that there exists enough probable cause for an arrest and thorough investigation?
>"I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never..."
That's enough said. If we don't know each and every detail about the case, why on Earth would we attempt to draw logical conclusions? There are a numerous amount of possibilities that could have arisen on the night with Trayvon and Zimmerman, but until we know everything, what's the point of debating it if information can be released in the next hour contradicting everyone's thoughts about the case?
The short answer is......................this is the debate club, it was created for any and all debates as long as people are enjoying themselves. We didn't know all the details about the Casey Anthony case but we still enjoyed debating and discussing it with each other, and when updates came in, discussion points changed. Nothing wrong with a lively debate.
Technically, nothing "wrong", but I think it does make people look foolish to debate the details of a case when they don't know the facts--whether it's this one, Casey Anthony, whatever.
They are debating the possibilities, what has come out and what has changed, the discussion updates as the information does, you will never EVER have all the facts in any case unless you were actually there and even then it can still be about intent and perception. So maybe it's foolish but it's interesting and anyone that does not want to discuss it is welcome not to.0 -
anyone that does not want to discuss it is welcome not to.
^Exactly.0 -
I just have to say it. I keep hearing people say "Until all the facts are in we can't say for sure." "You weren't there, you don't know what happened." "He's innocent until proven guilty."
You know, like everyone said regarding O.J.
:noway:0 -
So...are we ready to take a vote and move on to the sentencing stage?0
-
I just have to say it. I keep hearing people say "Until all the facts are in we can't say for sure." "You weren't there, you don't know what happened." "He's innocent until proven guilty."
You know, like everyone said regarding O.J.
:noway:
A friend and I are debating this on Facebook...his argument is "we don't know all the facts, you're basing everything off of assumptions"...uhhh...well...so is everyone else--judges, jury, law enforcement, etc. No one knows what really happened except for Zimmerman. So yes, I will base what I say off of assumptions. How that's a bad thing is beyond me. That's all anyone has to go off of. Just hopefully, everyone is doing it after educating themselves on the subject as much as possible.
0 -
A friend and I are debating this on Facebook...his argument is "we don't know all the facts, you're basing everything off of assumptions"...uhhh...well...so is everyone else--judges, jury, law enforcement, etc. No one knows what really happened except for Zimmerman. So yes, I will base what I say off of assumptions. How that's a bad thing is beyond me. That's all anyone has to go off of. Just hopefully, everyone is doing it after educating themselves on the subject as much as possible.
Precisely.
A. We can stop worrying that we're guilty of hanging the man. This isn't the trial, we're not on the jury. We can have any opinion we like on the subject. If we're later proven to be wrong, well hey it happens! The big people among us will gladly come back and admit it. But if everyone could stop acting like posting here may lead to rioting in the streets that would be swell.
B. No one will ever know the entire story except George Zimmerman. He shot the only other witness (as far as we know at this moment yada yada). That does not equal innocence. People are convicted EVERY SINGLE DAY at EVERY SINGLE TRIAL without the need for eyewitness accounts and recorded evidence of every aspect of the case. If "you weren't there, you don't know" were enough for a defense our prisons would be empty. So please stop.
C. You didn't say it about O.J. You didn't say it about Casey Anthony. Saying it now doesn't make you wise. It makes you a hypocrite.0 -
Precisely.
A. We can stop worrying that we're guilty of hanging the man. This isn't the trial, we're not on the jury. We can have any opinion we like on the subject. If we're later proven to be wrong, well hey it happens! The big people among us will gladly come back and admit it. But if everyone could stop acting like posting here may lead to rioting in the streets that would be swell.
B. No one will ever know the entire story except George Zimmerman. He shot the only other witness (as far as we know at this moment yada yada). That does not equal innocence. People are convicted EVERY SINGLE DAY at EVERY SINGLE TRIAL without the need for eyewitness accounts and recorded evidence of every aspect of the case. If "you weren't there, you don't know" were enough for a defense our prisons would be empty. So please stop.
C. You didn't say it about O.J. You didn't say it about Casey Anthony. Saying it now doesn't make you wise. It makes you a hypocrite.
Can I just quote this if my argument on Facebook continues?? I'll give you credit.
0 -
I just found "Groups" tonight, LOL, and this was the first one I have joined!
That said, I admit, I did not read all seven pages of this thread, as I am pressed for time at this minute, but do want to voice my opinion on this topic before I go....
The fact that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet, just enrages me. The fact remains, that he followed him, even when told not to, and Trayvon was a kid, armed with candy and a cell phone. If Trayvon was white, I do not think Zimmerman would have found him to be suspect and would not have started trying to play cop. This was a hate crime, plain and simple, and until we put our collective foot down and say enough, it will continue. Just look at what happned this past weekend with Jake England and Alvin Watts. Bottom line is it’s hard to imagine Zimmerman jumping to the conclusions he did if Trayvon was an unarmed white teenager. It’s also hard to fathom that England would open fire on a group of randomly targeted white people if he thought his father was killed by a white man.
Racism has to stop, the last time I checked, WE THE PEOPLE meant everybody, not just the ones that are just like you.....0 -
I just found "Groups" tonight, LOL, and this was the first one I have joined!
That said, I admit, I did not read all seven pages of this thread, as I am pressed for time at this minute, but do want to voice my opinion on this topic before I go....
The fact that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet, just enrages me. The fact remains, that he followed him, even when told not to, and Trayvon was a kid, armed with candy and a cell phone. If Trayvon was white, I do not think Zimmerman would have found him to be suspect and would not have started trying to play cop. This was a hate crime, plain and simple, and until we put our collective foot down and say enough, it will continue. Just look at what happned this past weekend with Jake England and Alvin Watts. Bottom line is it’s hard to imagine Zimmerman jumping to the conclusions he did if Trayvon was an unarmed white teenager. It’s also hard to fathom that England would open fire on a group of randomly targeted white people if he thought his father was killed by a white man.
Racism has to stop, the last time I checked, WE THE PEOPLE meant everybody, not just the ones that are just like you.....
There seems to be a double standard here. I found some information from a survery done in 1993, I know it is a bit dated but for some reason I am having trouble finding a somewhat credible source of info that is more recent.
From the U.S. Justice Department statistics survey:
Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey.
According to the latest annual report on murder by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most inter-racial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks.
I will NOT deny that people are targeted for race, in any form. I hate it, it blows my mind that in this day and age we still have this many issues with racism. At the same time, I am not a politically correct person and I try to keep my head out of the sand.. But it makes me furious when crime against a black person, by ANY other race is automatically a race crime. I think this is a huge contributing factor to why racism is still going strong today. Besides the obvious people with a racist agenda, you have just as many people throwing race around, dragging it into every issue and glorifying it. Whites commit crimes against blacks, blacks commit crime againsts whites and every race in between commits crimes against other races.
I believe the cause of racism is just much the fault of those constantly claiming it and using it to an advantage, such as Sharpton and Jackson, as it is those who actually live it.0 -
The state prosecutor is scheduled to make an announcement at 6 pm EST - word on the street is charges against Zimmerman are forthcoming..
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/12/us/prosecutor-in-trayvon-martin-case-to-make-announcement.html0
