Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Good luck with that... media couldn't care less and Obama just can't relate to old white men you see.
Martin wasn't even partially wholesome if the reports are accurate. Burglary tools? Pot pipe? Allegedly swinging at a bus driver? Suspended three times since Feb? Sounds like it shows at least the beginnings of a pattern... It's not irrelevant - it goes to the character of the alleged victim and is in no way attacking in any sense. These are facts - you may see them as an attack because you have sympathy, but that sympathy is irrelevant.
Of course they do. It would be impossible for human beings not to be effected by stereotypes -- in spite of what political correctness keeps insisting. Learning who our enemies are and being extra vigilant against them is what's kept us alive for tens of thousands of years.
No, it isn't backed up by 911 calls.And he didn't find him, which is his story, and its backed up by the 911 call.
You mean the same authority that didn't bother with taking the weapon, pictures, the victims cell phone, pictures of the shooter or victim, running toxicology on the shooter, etc? Those authorities?Then the remainder of his story, is corroborated by witnesses, according to authorities.
Once again for the 100x time - Order, told, suggest, instruct, etc, etc
Some dude or gal behind a phone...aka dispatcher. Their words have no basis in law
No, it isn't backed up by 911 calls.
Tettsuo said:You mean the same authority that didn't bother with taking the weapon, pictures, the victims cell phone, pictures of the shooter or victim, running toxicology on the shooter, etc? Those authorities?
Martin wasn't even partially wholesome if the reports are accurate. Burglary tools? Pot pipe? Allegedly swinging at a bus driver? Suspended three times since Feb? Sounds like it shows at least the beginnings of a pattern... It's not irrelevant - it goes to the character of the alleged victim and is in no way attacking in any sense. These are facts - you may see them as an attack because you have sympathy, but that sympathy is irrelevant.
Of course they do. It would be impossible for human beings not to be effected by stereotypes -- in spite of what political correctness keeps insisting. Learning who our enemies are and being extra vigilant against them is what's kept us alive for tens of thousands of years.
Past actions add to a view of character in any court in the land. Sorry it's inconvenient for you...Yup, attacking the victim with irrelevancies.
As long as it's factual, I will continue thanks.Keep up the quality work.
It lends credibility to Zimmermans actions and statements to the police.Here, let me give you a hint: the victim's character is not an issue,
His actions that night ALSO are relevant yes.his actions that night are.
You're factually wrong as it applies to our legal system. Character witness testimony relays the reliability and reputation as it comes from a person first hand. If the reports are accurate, Martin's character lends credibility to Zimmermans statements.He could be a gang banging, date raping, purse snatching asshole, and if he did nothing wrong on the night he was killed, then the only thing that matters is that he did nothing wrong the night he was killed.
So what?
I think we all heard Zimmerman talking to the 911 dispatcher. Martin wasn't on a 911 call.Really? You hear a Martin on the 911 call? You hear Zimmerman talking to him? Wow. You must have better ears than everyone else.
Most of the above was made public. So no, I don't have to work for the police department.And you have access to the grand jury evidence? You must work for the police department down there.
He could be a gang banging, date raping, purse snatching asshole, and if he did nothing wrong on the night he was killed, then the only thing that matters is that he did nothing wrong the night he was killed.
It lends credibility to Zimmermans statements to the police. That's so what.
Martin has no violence in his past, unlike Zimmerman. Unless of course you have some evidence that Martin attacked people at random, then it's applicable.Past actions add to a view of character in any court in the land. Sorry it's inconvenient for you...
No it does not. Martin's character has no history of violence. The reverse is true for Zimmerman.You're factually wrong as it applies to our legal system. Character witness testimony relays the reliability and reputation as it comes from a person first hand. If the reports are accurate, Martin's character lends credibility to Zimmermans statements.
It would be a stretch to think so... I see Zimmerman's statement that Martin was acting suspiciously as a minor thing, given Zimmerman shot and killed Martin.Which may be part of the reason why he has not been arrested.
Agreed.let the police and the DA's and the legal system sort it out, and lets not demonize or judge either party based on our media filtered hearsay, we do not know the whole story.
Are you sure, Martin did nothing wrong that night given at the time of the shooting, Martin was on top of Zimmerman, straddling him, delivering blows. This was supported by Zim having grass stains on his back, and blood on the back of his head?
Once again for the 100x time - Order, told, suggest, instruct, etc, etc
Some dude or gal behind a phone...aka dispatcher. Their words have no basis in law
Oh? What violent facts about Zimmerman are there - please link to them.Martin has no violence in his past, unlike Zimmerman.
See the OP links :roll:Unless of course you have some evidence that Martin attacked people at random, then it's applicable.
I'm sorry you're ignorant of the law. There's nothing I can do other than point it out over and over to you. Please educate yourself on Character Witnesses in the U.S. legal system.No it does not. Martin's character has no history of violence. The reverse is true for Zimmerman.
Schools don't conduct criminal trials nor have to met the standards of one to make decisions, nor do I. Caught vandalizing a locker (spray paint) and then searching his locker producing a screwdriver and girl's jewelry unwilling to say where he got it and who gave it to him can - as a "probably" lead ME to believe him a burglar/thief. If you point is that doesn't met a criminal trial standard? No, it doesn't.
Civil cases are ALL decided without reaching the standards of a criminal trial to. Obviously none of us are talking about putting Martin on trial at any trial. Rather, we are - based on facts - drawing conclusions on "issues," and one issue is was the days and days of presenting Martin as the perfect behavior teen. That opens the quesiton of was he?
It would seem obviously not. I suppose you can claim the school also entered into a conspiracy against him while a live, like claimed police did of his death. I agree with the school but also draw my own "likelihood" conclusions of my own.
You cannot assume events went differently and utopia follows. Maybe if Zimmerman hadn't followed Martin would have attacked someone else, burglarized a house, sold drugs to an 8 year old... There is no knowing the unknown.
IF Martin was actually just going home had done so, this also wouldn't have happened. If he hadn't started pounding Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk, this wouldn't have happened. If... if... if... That does NOT make shared responsibility.
This entire story is completely irrelevant to the events that unfolded. This is a right wing smear campaign aimed at a victim of a murder.
That argument is completely and utterly ridiculous. You are attempting to make up fantasies based on little to no evidence whatsoever, just saying that something COULD happen. A lot of things COULD happen, but that doesn't mean that they have or will happen.
I still haven't seen that witness testimony. Would you be able to link it please? Was it corroborated with any other witness testimony?
Stereotypes aren't genetic, they are learned. We are taught to be afraid or suspicious. Political correctness is a process of unlearning those lies, not for those that are already indocrinated, but those that are listening to every word we say. It's our words and behaviors that shape them and shape the future.
I don't claim, nor have I ever claimed that Trayvon Martin was perfect. I draw my conclusions based on these ideas
a) Neighborhood Watch does not mean you are the law, or that you have the authority to do an armed patrol confronting people you think are suspicious. It does not make you a police officer.
b) When you create the situation yourself, it's not self-defense. When Zimmerman got out of his car and pursued Martin, he created the dangerous situation.
These ideas, along with the facts in the case, means that claiming self-defense and justifiable homicide is shaky at best. It's unlikely that Zimmerman knew who he was following, and what kind of record this person had. So what you've got is a guy who goes out armed and confronts someone that he thinks is a criminal based on the fact that he was wearing a hoodie.
Is that the society we want to live in? Do you want to live in a society where someone can walk up to you with a gun because you "look suspicious?"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?