Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

ZIMMERMAN VERDICT IS IN - NOT GUILTY

Page 3 of 32 [ 512 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 32  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

14 Jul 2013, 11:02 am

zer0netgain wrote:
If you live in Florida and they do not use voter registration to identify potential jurors, then I stand corrected. In most states, as only a US citizen can be on a jury, they use voter registration rolls to identify and select potential jurors for jury duty. If you aren't registered to vote, they can't call you because they don't know you are there.


My mother never registered to vote and gets mail about doing jury duty. I think they got her name from her having an id from the dmv. I'm in NY.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:04 am

Fnord wrote:
Stop whining. It's over.

Either learn to deal with it or do something about it.


Its not over at all. The precedence is just beginning.

In another case a black female, Marissa Alexander is given 20 years just for firing a weapon. No-one however was killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/1 ... 30035.html

In a case where a black is given a custodial sentence after killing no-one and in another where a white defendent is acquitted entirely after a deliberate killing of an unarmed black teenager no longer apologist for the American judicial system can defend its impartiality. They have basically made the assertion that the lives of black people are worth less.

Unless the Federal American state changes its attitudes, black people will DO something. It will be civil unrest.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Last edited by thomas81 on 14 Jul 2013, 11:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

14 Jul 2013, 11:06 am

Well then, if you're going to deny that it's over, then how about, "Stop whining. Either learn to deal with it or do something about it" - does that sound better?



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:09 am

Fnord wrote:
Well then, if you're going to deny that it's over, then how about, "Stop whining. Either learn to deal with it or do something about it" - does that sound better?


I just said there will be civil unrest. Which is inevitable where you have a state of unrestrained institutionalised racism and all means of law-abiding contentious political sedition nullified.

We saw it during the black panther activities, We saw it during the London riots and we will see again it in the wake of Zimmerman-gate.

It is a shameful time to be a white American.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

14 Jul 2013, 11:13 am

thomas81 wrote:
In another case a black female, Marissa Alexander is given 20 years just for firing a weapon. No-one however was killed.


Are you kidding me? Did you actually read that article, or did you just pick up something that sounded good?

She left her house to go to her car - and instead of leaving and coming back later, came back specifically to shoot at her husband. The article doesn't even contend that she wasn't guilty - just that minimum sentencing rules are dumb.


_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:17 am

sliqua-jcooter wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
In another case a black female, Marissa Alexander is given 20 years just for firing a weapon. No-one however was killed.


Are you kidding me? Did you actually read that article, or did you just pick up something that sounded good?

She left her house to go to her car - and instead of leaving and coming back later, came back specifically to shoot at her husband. The article doesn't even contend that she wasn't guilty - just that minimum sentencing rules are dumb.

You're missing the point entirely.

The point is it highlights a massive inconsistency in the way defendents are judged depending on their ethnicity.

Either way in the Alexander case no-one was killed and 20 years is completely disproportionate for the crime. In this country, 20 years sometimes isnt even given to actual murders.

No matter how way you examine it, there is no way that Zimmerman had any moral right to shoot Treyon Martin. He had no malicious intent, was completely unarmed and had the misfortune of getting lost in a neighbourhood where he was unwelcome.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

14 Jul 2013, 11:22 am

thomas81 wrote:
Either way in the Alexander case no-one was killed and 20 years is completely disproportionate for the crime.


That may be true, but that has nothing to do with an over-zealous/racist judge - Florida law says that anyone who commits a felony with a weapon can get no less than 10 years, and if a shot is fired, 20 years. The judge in the case clearly wanted to deliver a more lenient sentence, but couldn't.

Quote:
No matter how way you examine it, there is no way that Zimmerman had any moral right to shoot Treyon Martin. He was completely unarmed and had the misfortune of getting lost in a neighbourhood where he was unwelcome.


The way I examine it, George Zimmerman says that Trayvon attacked him and was beating him. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise. It is a fact proved by the preponderance of the evidence that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman hitting him while Zimmerman was powerless to do anything about it.


_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

14 Jul 2013, 11:26 am

thomas81 wrote:
It is a shameful time to be a white American.

Only if you're not an American.

Shall we begin with the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust scandal?

How about the $80,000 that Peter Robinson's wife Iris gave to her 19-year old lover?

Or how about the 172 million pounds that Housing Minister Nelson McCausland overpaid on labor contracts?

Clean up your own country before you start in on someone else's.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:27 am

sliqua-jcooter wrote:
That may be true, but that has nothing to do with an over-zealous/racist judge - Florida law says that anyone who commits a felony with a weapon can get no less than 10 years, and if a shot is fired, 20 years. The judge in the case clearly wanted to deliver a more lenient sentence, but couldn't.

The racism therefore lies with the think tanks that legislate the laws, not necessarilly the judges.

To me it sounds though that the 'stand your ground' law didn't apply in this case because she was black. Alexander claimed that her ex spouse was trying to attack her.

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

The way I examine it, George Zimmerman says that Trayvon attacked him and was beating him. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise. It is a fact proved by the preponderance of the evidence that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman hitting him while Zimmerman was powerless to do anything about it.


Even if that is true, did it happen before or after Zimmerman provoked him? I seem to recall reading that at one state Zimmerman was actually pursing Martin.

All 911 calls i have heard does not make it sound like Martin was the antagonist.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:30 am

Fnord wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
It is a shameful time to be a white American.

Only if you're not an American.

Shall we begin with the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust scandal?

How about the $80,000 that Peter Robinson's wife Iris gave to her 19-year old lover?

Or how about the 172 million pounds that Housing Minister Nelson McCausland overpaid on labor contracts?

Clean up your own country before you start in on someone else's.


none of which has anything to do with racism.

in each of the 3 cases you have listed, I claim no association with the guilty parties.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Last edited by thomas81 on 14 Jul 2013, 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

14 Jul 2013, 11:31 am

thomas81 wrote:
To me it sounds though that the 'stand your ground' law didn't apply in this case because she was black. Alexander claimed that her ex spouse was trying to attack her.


Stand your ground didn't apply because she left, got her gun, came back for no legitimate, and shot at him. Had he followed her out to her car, then stand your ground likely would have applied - but she became the aggressor when she came back.

Quote:
sliqua-jcooter wrote:
The way I examine it, George Zimmerman says that Trayvon attacked him and was beating him. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise. It is a fact proved by the preponderance of the evidence that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman hitting him while Zimmerman was powerless to do anything about it.


Even if that is true, did it happen before or after Zimmerman provoked him? I seem to recall reading that at one state Zimmerman was actually pursing Martin.


There is no evidence that Zimmerman was pursuing Martin at the time of the attack. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did or said anything to provoke Martin. Regardless of what you believe, it has to be proven in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt.


_________________
Nothing posted here should be construed as the opinion or position of my company, or an official position of WrongPlanet in any way, unless specifically mentioned.


Alycat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,690
Location: Birmingham, UK

14 Jul 2013, 11:32 am

It always disappoints me with cases like this, where the truth is so clear and yet the outcome is wrong.


_________________
If you don't believe in dragons it is curiously true, that the dragons you disparage choose to not believe in you.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Jul 2013, 11:36 am

Alycat wrote:
It always disappoints me with cases like this, where the truth is so clear and yet the outcome is wrong.


Men rae was not proven by the prosecution. So the truth is not that clear. Maybe Z. acted in self defense. Maybe he didn't. But the prosecution did not prove Z acted with evil intent. That is why the verdict came out the way it did.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:38 am

sliqua-jcooter wrote:

There is no evidence that Zimmerman was pursuing Martin at the time of the attack. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did or said anything to provoke Martin. Regardless of what you believe, it has to be proven in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt.

From article in OP
Quote:
The earlier call, made to a non-emergency police line by Zimmerman, caught the defendant using profanities that were repeated by the prosecution to try to show he acted with spite, ill-will and hatred, the benchmarks for a second-degree murder conviction.

"f*****g punks. These a**holes, they always get away," assistant state attorney John Guy said as he began his opening argument on the first day of the trial. "Those were the words in that grown man's mouth as he followed in the dark a 17-year-old boy that he didn't know."

He concluded by telling the jury: "George Zimmerman did not shoot Trayvon Martin because he had to. He shot him for the worst of all reasons, because he wanted to."


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Jul 2013, 11:39 am

ruveyn wrote:
Alycat wrote:
It always disappoints me with cases like this, where the truth is so clear and yet the outcome is wrong.


Men rae was not proven by the prosecution. So the truth is not that clear. Maybe Z. acted in self defense. Maybe he didn't. But the prosecution did not prove Z acted with evil intent. That is why the verdict came out the way it did.


The fact that the jury had a white majority had nothing to with it. Of course not.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Jul 2013, 11:43 am

thomas81 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Alycat wrote:
It always disappoints me with cases like this, where the truth is so clear and yet the outcome is wrong.


Men rae was not proven by the prosecution. So the truth is not that clear. Maybe Z. acted in self defense. Maybe he didn't. But the prosecution did not prove Z acted with evil intent. That is why the verdict came out the way it did.


The fact that the jury had a white majority had nothing to with it. Of course not.


If the jury had consisted of red-neck Crackers I might buy the implication. But it was an all women jury and the prosecution had ample opportunity to challenge and even dismiss jury candidates they thought might be prejudiced.

And one sixth of the jury was non-white.

ruveyn



Last edited by ruveyn on 14 Jul 2013, 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.