• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Rachel Jeante

Seriously, your insistence of 6 foot males not being targets is almost pathological!!!

Did you find the national stats yet on 6 feet tall men not being targeted for crime?

Are 6 foot tall men impervious to bullets as well?

Let me go tell my 6 foot tall teenaged son not to watch out for himself when walking alone.:doh

Following anyone while they are walking alone at night is menacing in and of itself.

6 foot tall men are not generally the targets of opportunity muggers. Softer targets are preferred. Also, it's 7 pm.

Even if the follower was a mugger, why not go home? Are we to believe that a roadside mugger becomes a home invader if their mark makes it home? Nonsense. A roadside mugger remains a roadside mugger and does not change occupation just because someone makes it home.

But Martin was convinced, somehow by something, that this was no ordinary follower. This was no busybody or common mugger... no... this was the mugger that will break into your house to get you!

And he didn't call the cops. Instead, he went to a dark place.
 
West was disrespectful......... and she didn't lie about anything material to the case..
Got any proof to back up that absurd statement?
 
We have seen a toxicology report. He had 1.5 ng/ml of THC in his system. I've already posted the US government's assessment of what that means, but believe me when I tell you it means he wasn't smoking a joint. When you smoke a joint from just one puff, your blood will show something like 45 ng/ml for at least a few hours. He was dead about 15 minutes later, so we know he wasn't smoking weed on his way home from the store.

It's science!

Hmm...if the toxicology only showed trace amounts of weed then he must have been up to something else. I mean, hell, there's no point in being 17 if you're not up to something most all of the time.
 
Following anyone while they are walking alone at night is menacing in and of itself.

It was 7pm, probably every home had people eating supper. It was roadside. The odds of a mugger choosing such a circumstance and target are almost 0. The odds of the mugger following the large male home and breaking in? All but impossible. But we're supposed to assume this is a reasonable suspicion? But no call to the police. No knocking on a neighbor's door or going to a well light area. Instead... going to a dark place.

Let me go tell my 6 foot tall teenaged son not to watch out for himself when walking alone.

Tell him that if he thinks he's being followed... don't fail to call the police and go to a dark place - that's insane. Call the police and knock on a neighbor's door or go to a well light public place or home.
 
Really? I thought he was incredibly calm, patient and gentle towards her.

Well now, Josie, that's only because you haven't already tried and convicted Zimmerman. If you'd just come to the light a little you'd begin to understand.

Of course when you get right down to things it is kind of a weird, kaleidoscope/lava lamp kind of light with freaky things all stuck in it.
 
Really? I thought he was incredibly calm, patient and gentle towards her.

i do believe that west intentionally provoked her, indicating he might be asking questions for another two hours
this was after she made comments intimating she would not make herself available for a second day's testimony
to which west responded, and to which comment the judge advised she would make any and all schedule determinations

not saying west was wrong. he is his client's advocate and is using whatever works to his client's advantage
 
I saw her the same way.

I believed her. :shrug:

She's a teenager who didn't want to be there, never wanted to be involved, didn't put on airs or come across as coached, quoted TM as using foul/racist language, so clearly wasn't trying to make her friend look good to the white women on the jury, didn't hesitate to choose her words, just let whatever she was thinking spill out no matter who it helped/hurt, and had an almost savant-like ability to correct dates and times from 2 years ago, knowing exactly what she was doing on XX day, and that it was a Monday, etc. She was also clearly trying not to be emotional when describing the last few minutes of that final phone call, so she wasn't playing to the jury.

She was being herself, a moody kid being forced to do something she did not want to do. She didn't like having her words semantically dissected, wasn't afraid to speak up when she felt she was being misquoted, admitted she lied about why she didn't go to TM's wake because she didn't want to see the body of her friend, admitted she lied about her age because she didn't want her name to be used publicly. She had no ax to grind other than she simply didn't want to be there and wanted out as soon as possible.

I feel sorry for her, because her life has changed forever. People will point and stare, she'll see herself being called names on tv, everything she had never wanted to happen will indeed happen.

That's what I got out of her testimony, and yes, I saw most of it.
 
I don't think they are supposed to judge her personally. They are supposed to judge the information, details, and honesty if her testimony.

:doh:doh Rachael's lies, attitude, rolling eyes, hair pulling and the rest ain't going to fly with those 5 mothers on the Jury particularly as she is not a kid but 19 1/2 years old going into 12th grade. Six months from being 20. :doh
 
6 foot tall men are not generally the targets of opportunity muggers. Softer targets are preferred. Also, it's 7 pm.

Even if the follower was a mugger, why not go home? Are we to believe that a roadside mugger becomes a home invader if their mark makes it home? Nonsense. A roadside mugger remains a roadside mugger and does not change occupation just because someone makes it home.

But Martin was convinced, somehow by something, that this was no ordinary follower. This was no busybody or common mugger... no... this was the mugger that will break into your house to get you!

And he didn't call the cops. Instead, he went to a dark place.

Trayvon may have been unsure of his suspicions.. unlike George who acted on his paranoid fantasies and failed to speak.
 
We have seen a toxicology report. He had 1.5 ng/ml of THC in his system. I've already posted the US government's assessment of what that means, but believe me when I tell you it means he wasn't smoking a joint. When you smoke a joint from just one puff, your blood will show something like 45 ng/ml for at least a few hours. He was dead about 15 minutes later, so we know he wasn't smoking weed on his way home from the store.

It's science!

LOLOL.. Yep its science.
 
Trayvon may have been unsure of his suspicions.. unlike George who acted on his paranoid fantasies and failed to speak.

well, except for his speaking to law enforcement
and his response to martin
yea, he failed to speak [/sarcasm]

notice your side wants it both ways:
zimmerman should not confront the suspicious person you insist
but then you wonder why he did not verbally confront the suspicious person
 
I'm pretty sure she admitted to being coached by the previous attorney when she said "... but you know it's not" in that deposition.

If you paid attention to how she spoke on the stand you would know you cannot quote her words and put them in the context of dialogue you are accustomed to.
 
I believed her. :shrug:

She's a teenager who didn't want to be there, never wanted to be involved, didn't put on airs or come across as coached, quoted TM as using foul/racist language, so clearly wasn't trying to make her friend look good to the white women on the jury, didn't hesitate to choose her words, just let whatever she was thinking spill out no matter who it helped/hurt, and had an almost savant-like ability to correct dates and times from 2 years ago, knowing exactly what she was doing on XX day, and that it was a Monday, etc. She was also clearly trying not to be emotional when describing the last few minutes of that final phone call, so she wasn't playing to the jury.

She was being herself, a moody kid being forced to do something she did not want to do. She didn't like having her words semantically dissected, wasn't afraid to speak up when she felt she was being misquoted, admitted she lied about why she didn't go to TM's wake because she didn't want to see the body of her friend, admitted she lied about her age because she didn't want her name to be used publicly. She had no ax to grind other than she simply didn't want to be there and wanted out as soon as possible.

I feel sorry for her, because her life has changed forever. People will point and stare, she'll see herself being called names on tv, everything she had never wanted to happen will indeed happen.

That's what I got out of her testimony, and yes, I saw most of it.

That is pretty much spot on. Some racists assume the jurors will be judging her speaking or fashion style but I am confident they will see her testimony as accurate. I heard parts of her testimony and it was pretty funny when she castigated West about the deposition shuffling.

If Omara has any sense he will not let West brow beat her for another two hours because it will show the jury she is genuine even if abrasive but more importantly show they are really scared of her testimony.
 
well, except for his speaking to law enforcement
and his response to martin
yea, he failed to speak [/sarcasm]

notice your side wants it both ways:
zimmerman should not confront the suspicious person you insist
but then you wonder why he did not verbally confront the suspicious person

She did not say Z didnt verbally confront T. The witnesses help prove he verbally confronted T. She was pointing out he could have avoided the whole situation simply by introducing himself when he had three chances before the fight.
 
If you paid attention to how she spoke on the stand you would know you cannot quote her words and put them in the context of dialogue you are accustomed to.

That's a good way of putting it. She is definitely not easily quotable.
 
She did not say Z didnt verbally confront T. The witnesses help prove he verbally confronted T. She was pointing out he could have avoided the whole situation simply by introducing himself when he had three chances before the fight.

no, she wants it both ways
she does not want zimmerman to confront the suspicious person
while she now tells us she expects that he should have verbally confronted the suspicious person

your side is so losing this argument that you are now having to resort to making **** up
 
well, except for his speaking to law enforcement
and his response to martin
yea, he failed to speak [/sarcasm]

notice your side wants it both ways:
zimmerman should not confront the suspicious person you insist
but then you wonder why he did not verbally confront the suspicious person

George made all the worst possible choices.. He screwed up when he got out of his truck to follow Trayvon. He failed to wait for the police.. and when he created an frightening situation, he didn't speak.. or even answer Trayvon's question.. Instead he reached for his phone/gun.

Our behavior has an impact on other people.

George was grubby looking and behaving very suspiciously that night, but he was oblivious as too how he appeared to a stranger.

George is impossibly stupid.
 
It was 7pm, probably every home had people eating supper. It was roadside. The odds of a mugger choosing such a circumstance and target are almost 0. The odds of the mugger following the large male home and breaking in? All but impossible. But we're supposed to assume this is a reasonable suspicion? But no call to the police. No knocking on a neighbor's door or going to a well light area. Instead... going to a dark place.



Tell him that if he thinks he's being followed... don't fail to call the police and go to a dark place - that's insane. Call the police and knock on a neighbor's door or go to a well light public place or home.

I think it is funny that you think if you are being followed by someone in a car then on foot (and have the brain of a 17 year old) that you will always think clearly and logically at the time.

But frankly coming from someone who thinks being 6 feet tall precludes someone from fear of being attacked......I understand your lack of insight into his situation.
 
Well, I don't know. I understand Jeantel being softspoken and having a speech impediment, but that speech impediment didn't cause her to call the defense attorney a "cracker." That was unnecessary. I was actually surprised that the Judge didn't say anything to her about it. I can see getting upset at an attorney's line of questioning, but to call him a "cracker"?
 
Well, I don't know. I understand Jeantel being softspoken and having a speech impediment, but that speech impediment didn't cause her to call the defense attorney a "cracker." That was unnecessary. I was actually surprised that the Judge didn't say anything to her about it. I can see getting upset at an attorney's line of questioning, but to call him a "cracker"?

She didn't call Don West a cracker...

She wears braces on her top teeth.
 
George made all the worst possible choices.. He screwed up when he got out of his truck to follow Trayvon.
what was illegal about zimmerman getting out of his vehicle to continue to monitor martin's whereabouts in order to so advise the police he had summoned, when they arrived?

He failed to wait for the police..
but he did await the police
what information do you have which tells us he did not?

and when he created an frightening situation, he didn't speak..
first, he presented NO frightening situation. he was acting legally, serving as the eyes and ears of his community as the police staff had instructed
he did not verbally confront
i believe we all know by now that he was not expected to confront a suspicious person

or even answer Trayvon's question..
but we know that he did respond
and we will hear more about that response after 9am today

Instead he reached for his phone/gun.
and what evidence do you have to prove he reached for his GUN, sharon
and give us the actual cite [like that's actually going to happen, i know]

Our behavior has an impact on other people.
as martin demonstrated for us with his assault of zimmerman
and then that engagement in aberrant behavior had negative personal consequences for himself

George was grubby looking
yes, i am certain you wear heels when you go shopping at target [/sarcasm]

... and behaving very suspiciously that night,
very suspicious behavior, sharon, calling the police to report a suspicious person in his crime ridden community
very suspicious. thanks for the laugh


but he was oblivious as too how he appeared to a stranger.
yes, when one is acting legally, alerting the police to suspicious persons one must always be cognizant of how they appear to suspicious persons
appreciate the other laugh, sharon. really gonna miss you when the trial is over and zimmerman is found not guilty

George is impossibly stupid.
on this point i must defer to your first hand expertise
 
Well, I don't know. I understand Jeantel being softspoken and having a speech impediment, but that speech impediment didn't cause her to call the defense attorney a "cracker." That was unnecessary. I was actually surprised that the Judge didn't say anything to her about it. I can see getting upset at an attorney's line of questioning, but to call him a "cracker"?

Can you find a source?

In her testimony, Zimmerman was being referred to a "creepy-ass cracker". But I never heard her call the lawyer that.
 
no, she wants it both ways
she does not want zimmerman to confront the suspicious person
while she now tells us she expects that he should have verbally confronted the suspicious person

your side is so losing this argument that you are now having to resort to making **** up


You do not seem to understand the difference between introducing yourself and verbal confrontation.
 
Back
Top Bottom