or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 350

post #5236 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

Did not. Link?
How many sigs did they have to first decide to prosecute him on state charges?

EDIT - looks like just under 2.3 million. http://www.change.org/petitions/prosecute-the-killer-of-our-son-17-year-old-trayvon-martin

They'll have to try a little harder to get him federally.

Obama’s safe, overrated and airy speech
post #5237 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by zarathustra View Post

Obama’s safe, overrated and airy speech

Interesting quote from the Salon article,

"Some of us have an Inner Child. Others have an Inner N*gger. Is Holder the president’s conscience? Or his Inner N*gger?"

I shall leave it to wiser minds than mine to comment.

Viewpoints from the left and the right would be interesting ( from SF members that is ).

PS:The author's response to the article ( and very much to the above quote IMO ) is in the link. It is excellent and mirrors my response. I wonder what W E B DuBois would think? That's all I'll say.
Edited by rnoldh - 7/23/13 at 10:35am
post #5238 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by AldenPyle View Post


I wondered about that part too. I guess the answer is
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/07/22/zimmerman-verdict-86-percent-of-african-americans-disapprove/

"Some 60 percent of Hispanics say blacks and other minorities do not receive equal treatment with whites in the criminal justice system, and by a two-to-one ratio, they disapprove of the verdict in the Zimmerman trial."

I thought the interesting thing about this case is that it seems to be almost a perfect proxy for politics, not for race. How populations feel about the verdict (if they have an opinion), seems to break down exactly along how they vote. 85% of blacks say guilty, 60% of hispanics and a reasonably large minority of whites (i. Young people say guilty, old people say not. For the total population, its pretty much 40-40 plus 20 undecided.


photo zimmermanpollage_zps14ce2313.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/zimmermanpollrace_zps852191bd.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/zimmermanpollideology_zps9bac420f.jpg

post #5239 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNS View Post

There was a professor from UC Hastings Law School on NPR this morning, talking about the "Castle Law" in California and how there's essentially a Stand Your Ground Law in California as well but it just isn't named that and, furthermore, it wouldn't have applied to Zimmerman because he was the one who started the fight and so couldn't claim self defense. This last part is what I wanted to call into question and see if it is consistent with the facts of the case.

It's not consistent in that Trayvon had no physical injuries consistent with being punched or attacked (aside from the gsw). Zimmerman also made a statement to police prior to engaging a lawyer and less than an hour after the shooting and was uncontradicted that T attacked him first.

The idea that Z approached T with gun in hand and that action constituted "engagement" is likewise unsupported as it is admitted by all parties that Z did not shoot immediately but only after a prolonged fight on the ground. If Z had his gun out there's no reason he would have waited for a broken nose, black eyes and skull lacerations before shooting.
post #5240 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

If Z had his gun out there's no reason he would have waited for a broken nose, black eyes and skull lacerations before shooting.

I have no personal experience of this (fortunately), but isn't it apparently extremely hard to actually pull the trigger, even when you're in imminent danger? I was under the impression that a pretty good part of military training is about teaching soldiers to pull the trigger when they have an enemy soldier in their sights. It's quite plausible that if Z had his gun out he may well not have pulled the trigger until he was dazed by his head being bashed on the concrete.

That said, I think it quite unlikely that if the gun was out then T wouldn't have been trying to take the gun away from Z instead of bashing his head on the ground. I'm also wondering how easy it would be to take a gun out of a holster if you have someone on top of you, presumably with their legs in the way of where the gun would be (on his hip?) How easy would it be to get a gun out of a holster in this position:

post #5241 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty_Webb View Post

I have no personal experience of this (fortunately), but isn't it apparently extremely hard to actually pull the trigger, even when you're in imminent danger? I was under the impression that a pretty good part of military training is about teaching soldiers to pull the trigger when they have an enemy soldier in their sights. It's quite plausible that if Z had his gun out he may well not have pulled the trigger until he was dazed by his head being bashed on the concrete.

That said, I think it quite unlikely that if the gun was out then T wouldn't have been trying to take the gun away from Z instead of bashing his head on the ground. I'm also wondering how easy it would be to take a gun out of a holster if you have someone on top of you, presumably with their legs in the way of where the gun would be (on his hip?) How easy would it be to get a gun out of a holster in this position:


1. If Z had the gun out but didn't fire until his head was being pummeled and he was dazed then that's neither M2 nor Manslaughter.

2. If you had watched the trial they used a mannequin dummy to demonstrate how the gun would have been accessed and the prosecution pretty much conceded that point.
post #5242 of 6250
This thread is starting to veer into maritime lawyer territory.
post #5243 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post


photo zimmermanpollage_zps14ce2313.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/zimmermanpollrace_zps852191bd.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/zimmermanpollideology_zps9bac420f.jpg

Young kids these days.... baldy[1].gif

post #5244 of 6250
9% vs. 86%, wow...
post #5245 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

1. If Z had the gun out but didn't fire until his head was being pummeled and he was dazed then that's neither M2 nor Manslaughter.

2. If you had watched the trial they used a mannequin dummy to demonstrate how the gun would have been accessed and the prosecution pretty much conceded that point.

Fair enough and fair enough. Thanks
post #5246 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNS View Post

There was a professor from UC Hastings Law School on NPR this morning, talking about the "Castle Law" in California and how there's essentially a Stand Your Ground Law in California as well but it just isn't named that and, furthermore, it wouldn't have applied to Zimmerman because he was the one who started the fight and so couldn't claim self defense. This last part is what I wanted to call into question and see if it is consistent with the facts of the case.

There are differences in what you reference here. The "Castle Doctrine" as it is called is not the same as stand your ground as the doctrine only applies (at least in CA) to one in his home ("castle") or place of employment and negates any duty to safely retreat... SYG law applies to anyone legally in any place they have a right to be.

There is also a difference between one who is deemed the initial aggressor vs. the initial instigator. The defendant cannot create his own necessity for self-defense as the initial aggressor, although his conduct may have initiated the confrontation.
post #5247 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by whnay. View Post

9% vs. 86%, wow...

I wonder how much 86% has to do with the facts of the Zimmerman trail, and more to do with the frustration of past experiences of being profiled?

 

I also wonder how attitudes would change based on attire. Would anyone give someone dressed like Bill Cosby a second look in a Tiffany's store versus someone dressed in a wife beater, low hanging pants with boxers exposed?

 

I would love to see inner city schools in the worst neighborhoods have a dress code of a blazer. I think the way people respond to kids would be different based on attire and it would change these kids views of the world and how they fit in.

post #5248 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by whnay. View Post

9% vs. 86%, wow...


Shouldn't be surprising.  The majority of whites trust that the system works.  The majority of minorities (not just blacks) do not

 

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/criminaljusticerace_zps926cbe9e.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/criminaljusticeideology_zpsa7dc6791.jpg

post #5249 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post


Shouldn't be surprising.  The majority of whites trust that the system works.  The majority of minorities (not just blacks) do not

 

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/criminaljusticerace_zps926cbe9e.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k176/brotha_bel/criminaljusticeideology_zpsa7dc6791.jpg

How do you change minority perception without lynching Zimmerman?

post #5250 of 6250
Could we embed and re-quote huge jpgs of surveys many more times please? I love those huge fucking jpgs so don't you EVER just provide the damn link!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon