Trayvon Martin discussion

[Quiksilver]

"When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit."

Based on the evidence I'm surprised this argument has not reached some kind of conclusion yet.

The conclusion is that we are not privy to enough information to know whether either Martin or Zimmerman committed a crime.

Police deemed Zimmerman acted in self-defense, attested to by paramedics report at the scene and injuries sustained by Zimmerman.

The whole race thing is irrelevant, except to the people who care that Zimmerman might have thought Martin was suspicious because he was black.

^ To those people, I say: Everyone profiles based on information available, even skin color since in many places, cultures are still divided along racial boundaries.

Still, Zimmerman choosing to treat Martin as a suspicous person due to skin color (or clothing, etc) was not a crime, which again, renders the whole discussion of race irrelevant.

 

[Jaylan]

^Wrong.

The lead ivestigator deemed Zimmermans story to be BS and wanted to arrest and charge him. The first DA who was removed from this case went over the detectives head and said not to press charges. The new DA did a more thorough investigation and is now in agreement with the original decision made by the lead detective.

And how old are you? Not 8 right? So the "everyone does it" argument doesnt hold well in the adult world. Especially when it comes to wrongly profiling someone. Profiling someone and them ending up dead can very well be a crime if facts can prove you profiled them based on some form of discriminatory bias. Its why the feds investigate civil rights violations. So to say profiling cant be a crime is false.

 

[Who Dares Win]

^Wrong.

The lead ivestigator deemed Zimmermans story to be BS and wanted to arrest and charge him. The first DA who was removed from this case went over the detectives head and said not to press charges. The new DA did a more thorough investigation and is now in agreement with the original decision made by the lead detective.

And how old are you? Not 8 right? So the "everyone does it" argument doesnt hold well in the adult world. Especially when it comes to wrongly profiling someone. Profiling someone and them ending up dead can very well be a crime if facts can prove you profiled them based on some form of discriminatory bias. Its why the feds investigate civil rights violations. So to say profiling cant be a crime is false.

And can we ask where you obtained this informations?

 

[Jaylan]

Maybe if you paid attention to the news, youd know the facts of the case. Everything I said about the detective and DAs is correct.

 

[ArcBound]

Maybe if you paid attention to the news, youd know the facts of the case. Everything I said about the detective and DAs is correct.

Might pointing out specifics? In cases like this its important in pointing out which articles and which media corporations are broadcasting the news.

NBC has already been implicated in editing tapes to make Zimmerman sound more racist And they admitted and apologized for it

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/4/3/192036/1142

Likewise CNN and ABC have also been doing the same:

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2012/04/10/george-zimmerman-cnn-nbc/

"It led CNN to claim Zimmerman used the word “coon” to describe Martin; two weeks later, they walked it back because, well, he didn’t. In the case of ABC, the network initially reported there was no video evidence to suggest any injury to Zimmerman’s bald pate; later, someone over there pressed the zoom button and discovered there was a gash on his head after all."

Stop getting so defensive when someone asks you for a source. We just want to know where you got the info so we can judge if its reliable or not.

 

[Jaylan]

Do some of you just skip posts? I pointed out the specifics regarding the detective and the DA in my post 2 posts prior. Every media outlet has reported that the lead detective wanted to press charges as well as the original DA being removed from the case in favor of Angela Cory. So google is your friend.

Not to mention many people still hear the word "coon" on the 911 call.

My point was simply that if some profiles a person and it can be proven it was done because of discriminatory bias...that in of itself is a crime...despite Quiksilvers assertion that profiling isnt a crime.

 

[Who Dares Win]

Maybe if you paid attention to the news, youd know the facts of the case. Everything I said about the detective and DAs is correct.

Well I was answering but Arcbound did it faster and better than what I was doing, anyway he is particulary right about the last line.
You get emotional any time someone contradict you or ask for source, itsa forum mate dont get it personal and for effective communication it needs to know where u get ur info from.

You know better that oprah and the fbi fact book have a different weight for example, if u already chosed who's guilty and whos not and decide to pay attention only to some media
while ignoring others then dont complain if people call you out.

 

[Jaylan]

Again...the dismissive character attack of calling someone emotional instead of arguing the points made.

You guys need to learn new debate tactics here. And please point out in what way my response to quiksilver was emotional. I made factual statements regarding the case and regarding law. I also made the point that we are adults, not children and that in the adult world the "everyone does it" argument is just weak.

And my response to the source asking was rational as well. Most whove followed the case knows the facts about the lead investigator wanting to press charges and the first DA being removed. Its been in all the news. Questioning those facts is only done because some people wanna believe the system did its job right before Angela Cory got involved...but that wasnt the case.

 

[ArcBound]

Do some of you just skip posts? I pointed out the specifics regarding the detective and the DA in my post 2 posts prior. Every media outlet has reported that the lead detective wanted to press charges as well as the original DA being removed from the case in favor of Angela Cory. So google is your friend.

Not to mention many people still hear the word "coon" on the 911 call.

My point was simply that if some profiles a person and it can be proven it was done because of discriminatory bias...that in of itself is a crime...despite Quiksilvers assertion that profiling isnt a crime.

By specifics I mean sources. Countless people ask you for a source and you always say "google is your friend". That argument doesn't hold up in debate, the courtroom, science or any sort of logic. If you are using information you deem as facts in your argument it is up to you to give up that source, we shouldn't have to google it. And you shouldn't be getting defensive every single time. When someone makes a claim they have to back it up, you are making lots of claims and telling us to google them for you.

"It been in all the news" is not a source.

 

[Jaylan]

I dont need to find these facts for you...EVERY new outlet has reported what Ive said about the DAs and lead investigator. It makes no sense how the people here arguing this case havent known these facts or are asking for sources. Its been all over the news.

If you want sources on other things I talked about befote, that isnt widely available, ill gladly provide links. But with the stuff about the DA and lead detective, its in every single updated story on this case

And dont talk to me about sourcing...because ive seen many of your posts, and you dont practice what you preach.

Either way, widely acknowledged facts dont need a source...do I need to cite that Obama is the president when Im talking about it ona forum? Get real

 

[ArcBound]

I dont need to find these facts for you...EVERY new outlet has reported what Ive said about the DAs and lead investigator. It makes no sense how the people here arguing this case havent known these facts or are asking for sources. Its been all over the news.

If you want sources on other things I talked about befote, that isnt widely available, ill gladly provide links. But with the stuff about the DA and lead detective, its in every single updated story on this case

But as I have already shown in this thread many news outlets are prone to bias, so we need to know exactly which news outlets you got it from. Not all of your "facts" will be true that way.

"Everything I said about the detective and DAs is correct." - Jaylan

Once again you take every argument as personal and get defensive anytime anyone questions your posts. Fact is which media outlet you got your information from is very important.

And you DO need to find these facts. It's called burden of proof and is in science, the courtroom, logic and debate all over the world. It's pretty standardized. You can't write an English paper without a bibliography, a science paper without peer-reviewed scientific references, and debate and logic without citing your sources.

 

[Jaylan]

Of course Im going to defend my posts. So make a different argument. People defend their positions all the time.

Also, when it comes to widely accepted case facts that are reported the same by every media outlet, you dont need me to source things for you. A simple search will find you these facts on huffington post, fox news, or any other major site.

Would you ask me to source the fact that Martin was 17? Come on dude

 

[ArcBound]

Of course Im going to defend my posts. So make a different argument. People defend their positions all the time.

Also, when it comes to widely accepted case facts that are reported the same by every media outlet, you dont need me to source things for you. A simple search will find you these facts on huffington post, fox news, or any other major site.

Would you ask me to source the fact that Martin was 17? Come on dude

Being widely accepted doesn't make something a fact Jaylan. And yes you still need to source the facts because the outlet you got it from can have bias. It doesn't matter that a search might bring it up, it is your burden to bring proof to your arguments.

 

[Jaylan]

Whatever you say bro...people have been arguing the accepted facts of this case all thread without sourcing and opposition...and now you want me to "prove" something thats accepted as fact by all major media outlets and the courts as well? Really? Im done arguing this with you. There are certain aspects of this case that are not being debated by anyone. Next time some of you need to do your homework and pick your battles better.

 

[ArcBound]

Whatever you say bro...people have been arguing the accepted facts of this case all thread without sourcing and opposition...and now you want me to "prove" something thats accepted as fact by all major media outlets and the courts as well? Really? Im done arguing this with you. There are certain aspects of this case that are not being debated by anyone. Next time some of you need to do your homework and pick your battles better.

"I have no rebuttal and refuse to give sources to my claims and arguments that every should take as facts cause I said so"

 

[Jaylan]

Lol whatever you say kid. Not one person on this forum would disagree with what I said about the DA and detective, because those who have followed the case know the facts.

Like I said, when all the various sources and courts say what Ive been saying, whats there to cite? Would I need to cite the fact that Martin is 17 or that Zimmerman was a watchmen? No, these are already well established facts. People know the facts but continue as you are buddy.

 

[ArcBound]

Lol whatever you say kid. Not one person on this forum would disagree with what I said about the DA and detective, because those who have followed the case know the facts.

Like I said, when all the various sources and courts say what Ive been saying, whats there to source? People know the facts but continue as you are buddy.

Wow in the last 5 minutes I became your bro, kid and buddy! Amazing!

And as I have said for the umpteenth time "facts" with bias and slant aren't facts. But of course for the umpteenth time you will ignore it.

Now I know why this thread is 11 pages long lol

 

[Who Dares Win]

Jaylan you're wrong, when you support a theory or a fact or calling someone guilty of something its up to to DEMONSTRATE what you are saying and not the other guys duty to find evidences.

Maybe at oprah show or at the ladies night a random idiot saying something makes it true but not in the real world, you can avoid the need to defend your arguments the same way a mother defend her arrested son by simply proving what you are saying.

When this thread started you came out of nowhere arguing that zimmerman was hitler reborn guilty as sin and trayvon was just a poor kid who got killed for no other reason than racism.
This attitude is actually the worst possible ever, if so much chaos is happening now its because of that, the pressure on detectives and the courts due to angry mobs ready to riot is the following step from your mentality.
Mentality based on emotions and pre-knowledge(knowledge before the infos) taken for sure.

And as they told you 100 times being 17 doesnt make you unable to attack anyone or being a watchman makes you automatically a criminal, you would know it yourself if you would bother to think instead of "feel".
You are the single example of the angry mob mentality who riots after an emotional overcharge or a doubtful injustice.

 

[Jaylan]

Wow in the last 5 minutes I became your bro, kid and buddy! Amazing!

And as I have said for the umpteenth time "facts" with bias and slant aren't facts. But of course for the umpteenth time you will ignore it.

Now I know why this thread is 11 pages long lol

Dude what are you talking about? Lets go over what you are arguing needed sources. I said:

a) The lead detective in the initial investigation wanted to arrest Zimmerman and didnt buy his story contrary to what another poster said about the police believing Zimmerman

b) The original DA on the case apparently bought Zimmermans side of the story, and didnt think there was a case. Essentially he went over the lead detectives head...and is now not on the case.

c) Angela Cory has taken over and deemed the original investigation as not as thorough as it should have been. Shes the special prosecutor for a very good reason.

All of these things are established case facts without any bias or slant. They are reported the same way by every media outlet available. The lawyers arent arguing these facts, no pundits are arguing these facts, and the court papers have these facts down as such.

So what are you talking about? I am ignoring nothing? I just simply never understood why you needed me to provide you with links that contained these established facts, especially when you havent asked anyone else here to cite sources to back up establish case facts they discussed.

Get my point? If a, b, or c were being contested as false, then I could see why I would need to cite those things...however, this is not the case and I refuse to site something thats not being contested all because you simply want to be argumentative and not do a simple web search. Instead of making this a debate about what is or isnt facts...why dont you tell me why all of a sudden a, b, and c arent establish case facts even though they have been for weeks.

Jaylan you're wrong, when you support a theory or a fact or calling someone guilty of something its up to to DEMONSTRATE what you are saying and not the other guys duty to find evidences.

What are you talking about? You apparently have not read my posts well at all. Established facts in this discussion dont need citations. I dont see everyone citing sources for established facts of the case. How about you harp on everyone in this thread who didnt site every single fact when they discussed a case. Certain things about this case dont need citation because they are established facts. Zimmermans role in the neighborhood, Martins age, the lead detectives opinion, the first DA being removed from the case...all of these are established facts and everyone whos read about the case knows that.

Why argue just to argue? Why complain that I didnt provide a source for information everyone knows is true in this case? Come on now...be serious here...youre only asking me for a source on these facts because of your prior vendetta. Unless you are going to complain at everyone on this forum when they dont cite establish facts, then you should drop this silly argument.

Maybe at oprah show or at the ladies night a random idiot saying something makes it true but not in the real world, you can avoid the need to defend your arguments the same way a mother defend her arrested son by simply proving what you are saying.

What are you talking about? Its established facts about the case...why is it so hard for you and Arc to simply ready any media outlet story? Why arent you guys blasting others whove discussed case facts without sources? You guys are funny

When this thread started you came out of nowhere arguing that zimmerman was hitler reborn guilty as sin and trayvon was just a poor kid who got killed for no other reason than racism.

Am I not allowed to have an opinion about his guilt? Im human and humans form opinions. People will always have opinions formed before a case is done in court. An opinion doesnt mean Im not open to whatever results the courts get. I just have a way I interpret all the info, just like many others. I never said racism was the only reason Martin got killed. Please read my posts better. I said I believe theres a possible racial component to this case and people cant say with certainty that there wasnt.

This attitude is actually the worst possible ever, if so much chaos is happening now its because of that, the pressure on detectives and the courts due to angry mobs ready to riot is the following step from your mentality.

Even if Martin was spanish or white and there was absolutely no possible racial component, people would STILL be angry and marching in the streets. Remember Casey Anthony? People marched and protested against her. People harassed her and her family and race had nothing to do with it. So how about you recognize why people are mad? Its not just some race thing...its that a boy was killed and the system didnt want to do its job.

Angela Cory and the DA office acknowledged more needed to be done...and rigtfully so. If Zimmerman was arrested on the night of the shooting like the lead detective wanted, this story never makes national news. It didnt become a huge story until the Sanford PD and the county DA dragged their feets for a few weeks.

Mentality based on emotions and pre-knowledge(knowledge before the infos) taken for sure.

Think about this logically. Zimmerman would not have been arrested if Angela Cory didnt have damn good evidence to back her murder 2 charge. Shes a successful and hard nosed DA. If she was worried about public pressure she would have let a grand jury decide what to do.

You talk about mentality, but the mentality of some here is that Zimmerman shouldnt have been arrested. Well Im telling you to consider that Cory must have something good up her sleeve to have done all this. People will always form opinions based on pre knowledge and emotions, but they will try and figure out the facts with evidence in court. Some people need to get into that mentality. I still have my own opinions, but im behind what Cory is doing now to get the facts out. Its the right thing to do. Regardless of my own opinions in the case, if I was a prosecutor Id seek the facts and then judge accordingly. DAs do that themselves. They form opinions, make charges, and then let the facts come out.

And as they told you 100 times being 17 doesnt make you unable to attack anyone or being a watchman makes you automatically a criminal, you would know it yourself if you would bother to think instead of "feel".
You are the single example of the angry mob mentality who riots after an emotional overcharge or a doubtful injustice.

I never said being 17 makes someone unable to attack another person. I said Martin being 17 is an established case fact. Martin attacking Zimmerman first is not an established case fact and is an uncorroborated statement.

Being a watchman doesnt make someone a criminal. I never said that. Ive said being a watchman whos overzealous and ends up killing someone can be criminally negligent...and the courts will find out if Zimmerman is or not. If you took the time to read my posts word for word, with accurate understanding, youd see the points Ive made...instead you seem so quick to argue with things you disagree with that you miss my points entirely.

I dont know why you try to lump me in as some mob mentality goon. Again, you need to read my posts and understand what they say. I believe Zimmerman acted wrongly, and enough to be arrested. I believe theres a possible racial component to this case. The DA will examine this during trial...so its not an off base assertion. If it cant be determined that race played a role in Martin being profiled as suspicious, then the court will move on and so will I. Then they will find out if Zimmerman was criminally negligent in Martins death.

All people ever wanted was answers and an arrest. There was always enough for an indictment and trial. Realize that the public always wants to see justice done, irrespective of race. Because as I said earlier, people were acting bonkers with the Casey Anthony stuff...and the DA has to do things right this time with the case. The public doesnt want another botched trial with a lot of holes in it. They want a well presented case, regardless of the verdict

 

[metoo]

The media LIE ALL THE TIME, about pretty much everything, and are ignorant the rest of the time, mostly. So saying something is "in the media" proves nothing more than that you are gullible and ignorant. U gotta do better than THAT, homeboy.