Trayvon Martin’s mom: Jurors didn’t see my son as human

[ChrisL]

Can you say Susan Smith boys and girls?

I knew you could.

So now you're assuming that this woman doesn't love her son? What is wrong with you?

 

[Mason66]

So now you're assuming that this woman doesn't love her son? What is wrong with you?

You stated that because she was a mother and cared for him as a baby , here is your comment

"It is utterly ridiculous for you to try and suggest she is unaffected by the death of her child."

I was pointing out that just because she was his mother does not imply that it is ridiculous to suggest anything of the kind.

It has happened and will happen again.

Again youdo not know her and neither do I.

 

[ChrisL]

You stated that because she was a mother and cared for him as a baby , here is your comment

"It is utterly ridiculous for you to try and suggest she is unaffected by the death of her child."

I was pointing out that just because she was his mother does not imply that it is ridiculous to suggest anything of the kind.

It has happened and will happen again.

Again youdo not know her and neither do I.

People like Susan Smith suffer from a MENTAL ILLNESS, called sociopathy or psychopathy. :roll: You are suggesting that this mother who lost her son is at the least a sociopath. Why would you assume this about this woman you don't know? Grow up!

 

[ChrisL]

This has got to be one of the MOST ridiculous things ever. "Oh this mother is faking being sad about her son's death." How stupid.

 

[Crosscheck]

This has got to be one of the MOST ridiculous things ever. "Oh this mother is faking being sad about her son's death." How stupid.

When you pass an inebriated person on the street babbling incoherently do you stop and try have a conversation with him. No, you just move on as it would be useless to have any type of meaningful conversation.

Best to just ignore the trolls.

 

[ChrisL]

When you pass an inebriated person on the street babbling incoherently do you stop and try have a conversation with him. No, you just move on as it would be useless to have any type of meaningful conversation.

Best to just ignore the trolls.

It's so annoying though! :roll:

 

[Leo]

I think it's called being mean-spirited, and you and I have been around the boards enough to see it in bucket-loads. Perhaps the mean-spirited are just projecting... perhaps being SO unfeeling themselves, they project their lack of feeling by suggesting a mother doesn't care about her dead son / she's faking / didn't cry / should be home grieving and the rest...

It takes an unfeeling person to vilify a mother who's lost her teenage son in tragic circumstances. I think someone on the thread said that a year on, she should be over the death of her son now. Not just an unfeeling thing to say -- but bordering on senselessness.

I suspect you are totally correct (as usual). Mean-spiritedness is so unattractive.

But someone else (on another board - I think) pointed out that all this partisanship and character assassination actually devolves about the gun culture issue - even if subconsciously. Some see this as a tragedy which would not have occurred had Zimmerman not been armed, while others see this as a vindication of the right to go armed. Given the inflexible partisanship on the gun rights issue, it is doubtful either side will make the slightest attempt to see the other's point of view.

What puzzles me is the single mindedness with which the detractors of the dead teen have set about destroying his reputation. I do not believe any of that was necessary to maintaining Zimmerman's right to self defence. Martin could have been a saint and still done a foolish thing in initiating the scuffle - if that is what happened.

As for Martin's mother being over her son's death barely 12 months later - that is a ridiculous supposition. My dad died when I was like 8, and I doubt my mum is 'over it' yet - I certainly am not. And it would probably take me longer (if ever) to get over the death of my child (if I had one). It is not being a tough guy to ridicule the grief of someone else's loss, no matter what your opinion of the circumstances of that loss, nor is it a sign of strength not to feel sympathy. The 'hard man' syndrome is a load of cobblers.

 

[ChrisL]

I suspect you are totally correct (as usual). Mean-spiritedness is so unattractive.

But someone else (on another board - I think) pointed out that all this partisanship and character assassination actually devolves about the gun culture issue - even if subconsciously. Some see this as a tragedy which would not have occurred had Zimmerman not been armed, while others see this as a vindication of the right to go armed. Given the inflexible partisanship on the gun rights issue, it is doubtful either side will make the slightest attempt to see the other's point of view.

What puzzles me is the single mindedness with which the detractors of the dead teen have set about destroying his reputation. I do not believe any of that was necessary to maintaining Zimmerman's right to self defence. Martin could have been a saint and still done a foolish thing in initiating the scuffle - if that is what happened.

As for Martin's mother being over her son's death barely 12 months later - that is a ridiculous supposition. My dad died when I was like 8, and I doubt my mum is 'over it' yet - I certainly am not. And it would probably take me longer (if ever) to get over the death of my child (if I had one). It is not being a tough guy to ridicule the grief of someone else's loss, no matter what your opinion of the circumstances of that loss, nor is it a sign of strength not to feel sympathy. The 'hard man' syndrome is a load of cobblers.

Sorry about your dad Leo.

I do fall on the "other" side of the gun issue, and I don't disagree with the outcome of the trial. There are those of us who can have disagreements but still maintain our sense of reason.

However, it is really mean and cruel. To think a mother is "just faking" her sorrow over the loss of her child is just disgusting IMO. Those people should feel so ashamed of themselves. I think they must be just miserable and unhappy people to begin, OR they just don't understand and have never lost someone close to them.

 

[Redbeard]

My sympathy for her ends when she made the statement ’"I thought the human side of them would say, 'Listen this was a kid, this guy made a mistake.'" Juries are instructed to make decisions based on facts or lack there of, not emotions, to do otherwise would be a miscarriage of justice.

 

[Leo]

Sorry about your dad Leo.

I do fall on the "other" side of the gun issue, and I don't disagree with the outcome of the trial. There are those of us who can have disagreements but still maintain our sense of reason.

However, it is really mean and cruel. To think a mother is "just faking" her sorrow over the loss of her child is just disgusting IMO. Those people should feel so ashamed of themselves. I think they must be just miserable and unhappy people to begin, OR they just don't understand and have never lost someone close to them.

Thank you for that post. I understand and appreciate your position. I have said this before - but I think that, in the event that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, (and bearing in mind the judicial instructions) the jury had no choice other than to come to the decision they did. That is how the law works, in my country and in yours, and that is as it should be - irrespective of one's position on the gun issue. And of course I agree with your comments about Trayvon's mother.

 

[Leo]

My sympathy for her ends when she made the statement ’"I thought the human side of them would say, 'Listen this was a kid, this guy made a mistake.'" Juries are instructed to make decisions based on facts or lack there of, not emotions, to do otherwise would be a miscarriage of justice.

You are correct - that is exactly what is required of a jury. But her comments did not cause me to lose respect for her, or lose sympathy for her plight. I cannot imagine how horrible it must have been to lose your child under those circumstances, and on top of that, have the media demonise your dead child for the past year.

The decent thing to do is to take Thomas Gray's words, from his Elegy in a Country Churchyard, as a guide.

No further seek his merits to disclose,
Or draw his frailties from their dread abode
(There they alike in trembling hope repose),
The bosom of his Father and his God.

 

[ChrisL]

My sympathy for her ends when she made the statement ’"I thought the human side of them would say, 'Listen this was a kid, this guy made a mistake.'" Juries are instructed to make decisions based on facts or lack there of, not emotions, to do otherwise would be a miscarriage of justice.

I totally agree with this part of your post, but I still have sympathy for the mom.

 

[blackjack50]

non of the TM supporters accept the notion that TM did anything wrong. They seem to ignore the fatal seconds when the struggle began between GZ and TM.

I take the comment as a coming from a parent who cannot accept their kid might have esculated the situation.

Which is understandable for the parent. I feel bad for them. I mean how could you come to grips with your child starting a fight that got them killed? If anyone is allowed to be pissed it is them.

But Trayvon was wrong to start the fight. It sucks he paid for it with his life.

 

[nota bene]

You are correct - that is exactly what is required of a jury. But her comments did not cause me to lose respect for her, or lose sympathy for her plight. I cannot imagine how horrible it must have been to lose your child under those circumstances, and on top of that, have the media demonise your dead child for the past year.

The decent thing to do is to take Thomas Gray's words, from his Elegy in a Country Churchyard, as a guide.

You mean "the paths of glory lead but to the grave"? Or "Full many a gem of purest ray serene"?

I don't think the media has demonized Trayvon Martin. Quite the opposite, given that the photo so widely published was of him as a little boy.

The death of any child under any circumstance or at any age is the most devastating loss of all. It violates the "natural order of things," meaning that you're supposed to bury your parents, not a kid.

But this doesn't excuse Fulton's accusation that the jurors didn't see her son as human. I don't think there's an excuse for this, not even under these circumstances.

 

[opendebate]

You mean "the paths of glory lead but to the grave"? Or "Full many a gem of purest ray serene"?

I don't think the media has demonized Trayvon Martin. Quite the opposite, given that the photo so widely published was of him as a little boy.

The death of any child under any circumstance or at any age is the most devastating loss of all. It violates the "natural order of things," meaning that you're supposed to bury your parents, not a kid.

But this doesn't excuse Fulton's accusation that the jurors didn't see her son as human. I don't think there's an excuse for this, not even under these circumstances.

I think given how she must be feeling she is conducting herself with a great deal of grace and dignity. I would be a sobbing crazy wreck. I also think she has every right to offer her opinion about the juries verdict, especially since Trayvon is not here to speak for himself.

 

[nota bene]

I'm not sure how Ms. Fulton is conducting herself; like you, I see only what's on TV/online. I think it's probably very gratifying to be sought after by such luminaries as Beyonce. But that doesn't excuse what she said about the jurors. Did she meet with them? Does she know what's in their hearts? They're mothers too--does she seriously think they didn't regard her child as "human"?

This is such a grotesque insult, and I do think it's indefensible despite her grieving.

 

[Psychoclown]

That doesn't negate her view at all. I really don't care what she says and does. Because she's his mother - she can do and say whatever the **** she wants.

She earned that right when she birthed him.

Trial or no - verdict or no - that doesn't alter anything for HER.

You don't have to listen - no one *has* to listen.

Yes, she has a right to say whatever she wants and yes I'm sure she's experiencing some intense grief right now. Even though its been some time since Trayvon was killed, I have no doubt this trial has stirred up old feelings and brought them back to the forefront. I don't criticize her for grieving. But when she starts making public statements and joining the public discourse about the trial, race relations, or any other topic, her grief is not a shield that makes her immune to criticism, rebuttal, correction, or any other response. Suffering a personal loss does not mean one can throw out controversial public statements and expect to go unchallenged.

As for passing judgement on her, again I understand she's a mother who lost her son and that has to be an intense emotional loss for her. But again, if she insists upon making public statements, then the validity and intelligence of her statements is free to be judges just as any other commentator's statements would be judged. If she doesn't want to deal with that, then she is free to keep her thoughts and comments private and not issue them to the public.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Did Trayvon see Zimmerman as a human being?