• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Geraldo Rivera: Trayvon Martin's 'Hoodie Is As Much Responsible As Shooter


No. They shouldn't. They shouldn't think about presentation any more than white kids with mohawks or Latin kids with tattoos. They should be allowed to walk dressed however and wherever the **** they choose without fearing some dickhead will walk up to them with a gun. Clothing do not a criminal make and it's ridiculous prejudices like yours that are what got Trayvon killed to begin with.
 
Last edited:


Well, for starters we can look at the bolded lines and I can ask you to stop putting words in my mouth and making assumptions about my viewpoint.

I've already said, several times, that Zimmerman's claim to self-defense, under current law, could be called into question because it looks like he initiated the confrontation. That puts him in a bad light.

Second, not everyone agrees that Zimmerman said "coon" on the phone, it isn't certain. Even if he did, that in itself doesn't necessarily make this a hate crime alone.

Third, there are two eyewitnesses that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman suffered injuries. This tends to support Zimmerman's self-defense claim.


Personally I think the local DA/solicitor whoever was in error in not preferring some kind of charges and letting Zimmerman have his day in court to justify his actions. As I've said elsewhere, I'm not sure what the outcome of that would be, I am not assuming I have all the info that is available.

I've tried to make some of the info that IS, available to those in this thread who seem to be ignoring or unaware that there was a fight and at one point Martin was on top and injured Zimmerman. That's all.

Unlike you I am not rushing to judgement of either Zimmerman or Martin. I'll await the results of the investigation thanks.
 
Sure i am. that's why I am blaming Geraldo for his inane comments. There's some pretzel logic. Typical right wing reasoning. Twist it and twist it some more.


:spin:Weak, very weak... :sinking:
 
based on lots of evidence from Zimmerman's past, we have GOOD REASON to question his motives & state of mind in this case.

It is perfectly logical to assume that Zimmerman, saw Martin as an excuse to once again be a wanna-be cop, a one-man defense force, a Dirty Harry without a badge.

he persued Martin in a car. he pursued Martin on foot. he called him an "asshole" & a ****ing punk (or coon) on the phone with the police.

clearly, this man was looking to start some ****. and he started it.

based on all of this, I believe that 17 year old Martin, in a strange neighborhood, walking home to his father's house, had a legitimate reason to be fearful, and to stand his ground against Zimmerman. If Zimmerman did indeed approcach Martin, after following him both on foot and in a car, then Martin had the legal right to react with violence to defend himself.

he did not have to run away. he had every right to push Zimmerman if Zimmerman did indeed approach him.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Personal attacks stop now. Some infractions have already been levied. Next step... thread bans and more infractions.
 

Maybe you could link to a post where I've been a 'cheerleader' for MSNBC?

I'd respond to your 'partisan hack' insult, but I see the moderator has issued a warning so I'll let it go.
 
Oooo k there bud. You got me.






Not.
 


Dude... DO you listen to yourself???? You pretty much excuse Zimmerman of anything. You pretty much just said Trayvon is dead because he was young and black. If he would have ran from Zimmerman he would have been alive today. But of course not running is a reason to kill. Well like I said in earlier post, people like you do not value black lives. I wish you would just admit that you are racist.
 
...Would that kid still be alive today?
If he had stayed out of Zimmerman's sights after he "lost" him or had not attacked or confronted him from behind - most likely.....

the only evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman, is Zimmerman's statement to the police, and a dishonest Fox News Tampa headline.
 


Correction. You are trying to justify Zimmerman's actions for gunning down Martin because lets be honest for a minute. If that kid was a 17 year white kid gun down the same way, there would be outrage and tears from people like you. This kid didn't do anything wrong except be black at the wrong time. wake up man we are not living in the fifties anymore. What is this now? Are we approving of shooting unarmed people now because they look suspicious? As a black man I have every God giving right to walk down the street and not worry about somebody harrassing me and shooting me in the back.

Bottom line this is what you believe:

Martin = Guilty until proving innocent

Zimmerman = Innocent until proving guilty

Wow I can see the fairness in that :roll:
 
[h=1]Geraldo Rivera: Trayvon Martin's 'Hoodie Is As Much Responsible For [His] Death As George Zimmerman' (VIDEO)[/h]

Hehehe, more evidence.

Geraldo is Hispanic. Zimmerman is Hispanic. Of course Geraldo takes Zimmerman's side.

We whites can play referee on this one.
 


Bud you haven't been here long and you don't know me. You're throwing around accusations of racism and you don't even know what race I am.

When the case first was mentioned here, based on information that was available at that time, I said it looked like Zimmerman had exceeded the bounds of the law and committed manslaughter.

More information has come out now, which casts considerable doubt on the whole situation and makes it very difficult to say who was "in the right" overall.

I'm pointing out facts, and saying plainly that it is difficult to judge this case based on facts available. You've already convicted Zimmerman in your mind, of a hate crime.
 
the only evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman, is Zimmerman's statement to the police, and a dishonest Fox News Tampa headline.

No, a eyewitness named "John" has claimed that in a tussle, Zimmerman was on the bottom, and I think the police have now affirmed that he had a broken nose.
 

I'm not saying it is a hate crime, but it was definitely motives to go after the kid. He was caught on tape clearly sayng " they always get away". Who is they? I know what he means and I'm sure you knows what it means. I listen to the tape recording 20 times and he said coon. How all of the sudden cases like these are difficult? Thousand of men are in prison right now for the same thing that Zimmerman got to walk for.

We can disagree all night but this is fact. If Zimmerman gets away with this, Florida is sending out a dangerous message . It is okay to kill another individual if you provoke the altercation and feel threaten. I can go to my neighbor right now, if I didn't like him, and pick a fight with him just to claim self defense and shoot him. THis is what it is all about. There is no way in hell Zimmerman would be free if this kid was a white kid. And you know that is fact.
 
No, a eyewitness named "John" has claimed that in a tussle, Zimmerman was on the bottom, and I think the police have now affirmed that he had a broken nose.

No. They haven't. It's his lawyer claiming he got a broken nose. The police haven't said anything. Please quit making stuff up?
 
Good going, Geraldo strikes again! Idiot! Anybody who's afraid of kids of many colors, in hoodies, hasn't been to an average college campus lately. In the rain, kids especially wear hoodies. Not to mention on a college campus, the hoodie wearer is more likely to jaywalk right in front of your car at any moment!
 
That is not what I said.
The color of his skin holds no meaning to me, or to the relevance of Trayvon's action.

Let me make it clearer for you.
If Trayvon had not attacked Zimmerman he most likely would still be alive today.



the only evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman, is Zimmerman's statement to the police, and a dishonest Fox News Tampa headline.
The first part you got correct, the second part isn't evidence.



No, a eyewitness named "John" has claimed that in a tussle, Zimmerman was on the bottom, and I think the police have now affirmed that he had a broken nose.
The police report written by one named Timothy Smith says that Zimmerman "was also bleeding from the nose and the back of the head".

Please provide this report from police saying he had a broken nose.
 



When you get a chance come out of unicorn, puppydog, fairy tale, magicland, here in reality, while you may be right in principle, reality comes crashing in.

His view isn't "prejudiced" here, it's more an observation.


There are many things that should be. But they are not.


Blue angels, cops dressing up like bikers, guess how they get treated?
 
Maybe the hoodie alone isnt enough to suspect someone on, but a hoodie, can of iced tea, and a bag of skittles? Doods lookin to start something,
 
from Excon

Let me make it clearer for you.
If Trayvon had not attacked Zimmerman he most likely would still be alive today.

First, we do not know that such an "attack" ever happened as you describe it.
Second, the attack could well have been Zimmerman attacking Martin and the kid standing his own ground and defending himself.
Third, one thing seems clear, If Zimmerman would have followed instructions and stayed in his vehicle and NOT confronted Martin, the kid would be alive today. Zimmerman provoked this incident and bears responsibility for what evolved from his confronting of Martin. If somebody stops or attempts to stop you while you are exercising your own rights you are well within your right to ignore them or even tell them to F off and get out of your face. And if they get pushy or belligerent in response, then this stand your ground law works to your benefit.
 
First, we do not know that such an "attack"
Yes we do know.
The evidence is that Trayvon attacked him from behind - Zimmerman's statement.
There is no other evidence that disputes that.


Second, the attack could well have been Zimmerman attacking Martin and the kid standing his own ground and defending himself.
There is no evidence that supports this and is purely supposition.

There is no reason to engage in supposition that is contrary to known evidence or that isn't supported by the evidence at all.


Zimmerman working in the capacity of NW and following Trayvon to keep him under observation until the police he called arrived is in no way wrong or incorrect.

If you wish to engage in this type of supposition when there is no need to then supposition flows both ways.

It is just as clear that Trayvon shouldn't have attacked a person from behind with a weapon (can of tea), because this lead to him being killed.

See how that works?
What I stated is very possible, and what some may even consider probable, considering the evidence, but it is nothing more that speculation because there is no evidence that Trayvon actually hit him with the can of tea from behind.

Only evidence that Zimmerman was attacked from behind. Not with what, or how. Only that that is happened.
An attack that came from behind.
 

the grass stains on Zimmerman's back, contradicts that evidence.

the witnesses' statement that he saw Martin hitting Zimmerman while Zimmerman was on his back, again contradicts this.
 



Response to the italics: No, you can't just go provoke your neighbor, kill him and claim self-defense... you don't seem to understand SYG law. For one thing if you go on your neighbors yard or in his house and start something you're almost automatically in the wrong. This case was different. Zimmerman's original situation was on the phone with 911, keeping observation on someone he considered to be acting suspicious. When Zimmerman left the vehicle to follow the 'suspicious individual' he entered a dubious grey area, because this is a public street rather than a private yard or home.

The crux of the matter is probably going to be whether Zimmerman or Martin initiated the physical fight, and so far we don't have conclusive info on that one. Zimmerman says Martin attacked him; eyewitnesses saw Martin on top of the tussle; so far no one claims to have seen who assaulted who first. In the absence of contrary evidence there will tend to be an assumption of innocence, you know. We can't convict a man on what he MIGHT have done without evidence.

Zimmerman would probably have been on thin ice for shooting an unarmed and physically smaller person had it not been for substantial injuries he sustainted in the fight. As it is, it is a toss-up as to how this will fall out in court.

In no way would Zimmerman's acquittal send a message that you can just go start a fight and kill someone in cold blood; this situation is an unusual one and as I keep saying, it is legally very borderline and if Zimmerman does ultimately walk he'd better be one grateful SOB because he really pushed the bounds of the law on this one hard.

Replying to the bolded part: I have no such knowlege and neither do you. You are presuming institutional and widespread racism on the part of local police and prosecutor's office in that statement and I'd need to see some proof that they have a history of racism before I buy into that. This is an ASSUMPTION on your part, based on your own apparent biased tendency to assume racism anytime a black person is involved.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…