He was all cleaned up in the video. To my understanding, he was not taken into custody right after he confronted Martin. It was, at least, a day later. I can't tell from that video if his nose is broken or not. It doesn't look bruised. He also claims he suffered a cut to his head but it is in the back, not easily seen from that angle. Point is, if he wouldn't have confronted, he would have not been hit, period. The cops told him not to harass the kid and he did it anyway. They clearly told Zimmerman not to do it.
Actually, I've been hearing on the news this morning that the video of Zimmerman arriving at the police station had actually been made just half an hour after Trayvon Martin had been killed. So actually, you would think the guy would have been covered with blood.
Joined: Jun 19, 2008 Posts: 7998 Location: Babylon
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:28 pm Post subject:
Yeah, it says a couple of hours after the incident in the article featuring the video. I agree that man should be arrested. He harassed then murdered a kid that was just walking down the street. Anywhere else in the US he would have been in jail an hour later. Not in Florida. I guess that what happens to a state having a Bush as a governor for an extended period of time. _________________ JUST LET THE GUY BE FROM K PAX!!!!!!
Joined: Oct 17, 2009 Age: 45 Posts: 5754 Location: Vancouver, BC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:46 pm Post subject:
I would be content to see all of this go in front of a jury.
I loathe the practice of "trial by media," and far prefer this evidence to be presented to twelve people who will use their good judgement and good sense to arrive at decisions of fact.
The jury system has served English justice, and the justice of her common-law heirs admirably for centuries. I continue to trust the good sense of juries not to be hoodwinked too aggressive prosecutions, nor by too slick defences. A sense of fairness and decency and an open mind on the part of 12 independent thinkers goes a long way. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than we can do over the internet. _________________ --James
Joined: Mar 23, 2010 Age: 38 Posts: 3160 Location: chi town burbs
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:40 pm Post subject:
visagrunt wrote:
I would be content to see all of this go in front of a jury.
I loathe the practice of "trial by media," and far prefer this evidence to be presented to twelve people who will use their good judgement and good sense to arrive at decisions of fact.
The jury system has served English justice, and the justice of her common-law heirs admirably for centuries. I continue to trust the good sense of juries not to be hoodwinked too aggressive prosecutions, nor by too slick defences. A sense of fairness and decency and an open mind on the part of 12 independent thinkers goes a long way. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than we can do over the internet.
well said _________________ everything is funny if your looking at it right
Joined: Feb 08, 2011 Posts: 2072 Location: Seattle, WA
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:52 pm Post subject:
Until every last detail regarding the Treyvon Martin case has come to light, nobody should jump to conclusions. But apparently the protesters have decided that a hate crime occured.
Joined: Feb 25, 2012 Age: 39 Posts: 751 Location: New Orleans, LA
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:47 pm Post subject:
yeah... My biggest issue with cases like this are that a) no one has ANY idea what happened for at least one full minute... and b) no one has any business sticking their noses in this...
Like the Kony 2012 thing... People from all over Uganda are popping up and saying it is BS...
He was all cleaned up in the video. To my understanding, he was not taken into custody right after he confronted Martin. It was, at least, a day later. I can't tell from that video if his nose is broken or not. It doesn't look bruised. He also claims he suffered a cut to his head but it is in the back, not easily seen from that angle. Point is, if he wouldn't have confronted, he would have not been hit, period. The cops told him not to harass the kid and he did it anyway. They clearly told Zimmerman not to do it.
Actually, I've been hearing on the news this morning that the video of Zimmerman arriving at the police station had actually been made just half an hour after Trayvon Martin had been killed. So actually, you would think the guy would have been covered with blood.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
One problem with the media coverage that I have seen lately is the idea has been generated in the media that the police department was acting in tandem with Zimmerman to cover up the incident, because of his overall appearance in the video.
However, according to the full police report, Zimmerman was not questioned until he arrived at the police department. In the police report blood from the nose and blood from the back of the head was mentioned, but was not described as serious or profuse.
No blood was mentioned reported anywhere else on his body, just moisture and grass on his back. If there was visible blood splattered elsewhere on Zimmerman, it would have mentioned in the police report; the police report is publically available for perusal, so one wouldn't expect to see any blood splattered on Zimmerman, per the actual report from law enforcement observation.
First Aid was reported in the back of a police cruiser; hard to imagine them even allowing Zimmerman into the police cruiser if the bleeding was serious, or the injury appeared to be serious.
The only communication overheard in the police cruiser was that Zimmerman stated he yelled for help, but did not receive help.
The investigator at the police department considered there to be enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman, however that judgement was overuled by the states attorney's office through Communication to the Chief of Police.
Zimmerman's appearance in the police video, really doesn't contradict the police report, just Zimmerman's story of what happened, that did not justify self-defense from the judgement of the investigator.
Fortunately, a new video still has called into question the assertion that there was no visible wound on the head.
I'm glad, because my concern would be that if someone in the general public thought that there was actual evidence that the cops identified in that video were involved in some type of cover-up someone might decide to force vigilante action on the cops.
I would suggest that the problem here is the stand your ground law, and the fact that the state attorney's office determined that there was not sufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman, per the new law.
If it were not for the change in the new law, it is unlikely that the investigators judgement would have been overuled by the state attorney's office. The case would have likely gone to trial, without all this drama generated by the media.
It appears though that the drama, in part, was necessary to bring to light the problems with this new law that resulted in Zimmerman's immunity from being charged in the incident.
If there is any bright light in the tragedy, and media coverage, it is possible that the law may be modified to prevent someone in the future, provided immunity from arrest, that reasonably should be allowed, to ensure that justice can be appropriately determined through the court system.
Not only in Florida, but nationwide, as these new Stand your ground laws spread through the nation.
Joined: Dec 08, 2010 Age: 37 Posts: 1779 Location: Bellows Falls,Vermont USA
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:21 am Post subject:
i dont understand why the media is so obsessed with this travan martin case.last week in boston in a case known as the mattapan masacre 1 defendent was aquited and the other was given a mistrial.the mattapan masacre ocured in 2010 in the mattapan section of boston where two gunmen killed a mother and her two infant children and the father was shot in the neck and paralyzed.why does the media think the life of one is more important then the four.the real miscarriage of justice was in boston _________________ Abstract concepts are for those who dont know there facts.Liaison for the political forum.Please contact if you have any questions or problems
i dont understand why the media is so obsessed with this travan martin case.last week in boston in a case known as the mattapan masacre 1 defendent was aquited and the other was given a mistrial.the mattapan masacre ocured in 2010 in the mattapan section of boston where two gunmen killed a mother and her two infant children and the father was shot in the neck and paralyzed.why does the media think the life of one is more important then the four.the real miscarriage of justice was in boston
I admit I've never heard of that case, but those certainly were a couple of insane decisions. Why were the two perpetrators released?
Joined: Dec 08, 2010 Age: 37 Posts: 1779 Location: Bellows Falls,Vermont USA
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 5:04 am Post subject:
Kraichgauer wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
i dont understand why the media is so obsessed with this travan martin case.last week in boston in a case known as the mattapan masacre 1 defendent was aquited and the other was given a mistrial.the mattapan masacre ocured in 2010 in the mattapan section of boston where two gunmen killed a mother and her two infant children and the father was shot in the neck and paralyzed.why does the media think the life of one is more important then the four.the real miscarriage of justice was in boston
I admit I've never heard of that case, but those certainly were a couple of insane decisions. Why were the two perpetrators released?
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
there are a couple of factors
one is that the lone surviver and witness was shot in the neck and was to injured to be able to say on the witness stand for sure that the two people in the courtroom were the shooters.you cant be that wounded and be able to recall all those deatails
second the area in boston were this happened was a high crime area and heavely under the control of gangs and witnesses were to afraid of retaliation to be able to come forward.
also with the defendent that got a mistrial there was a 11 to 1 vote in favor of conviction.so a lone holdout could mean a juror was bribed or threatened
3rd unlike the travon martin case,the suspects were black as also were the victims.but with black suspects there was not an outpouring of suport from the civil rights movement.unlike travon martin who the likes of al sharton has advocated for.so for instance had al sharton made a stink to mayor manino maybe witness protection could have been offered to possible witnesses.the suffolk county D.A office vows to re try the second gunmen(the first was aquited)but as time passes memories fade and retrial rarely yield conviction _________________ Abstract concepts are for those who dont know there facts.Liaison for the political forum.Please contact if you have any questions or problems
Joined: Aug 13, 2009 Posts: 3341 Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:14 pm Post subject:
Feralucce wrote:
MrXxx wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
a court of law has nothing to do with truth... OJ still walks free
Exceptions do not necessarily disprove the rule. Every system we have is prone to human mistakes. The fact that the system fails sometimes doesn't mean it's purpose "has nothing to do with truth." Though it is true that reality doesn't always match stated altruism.
It's what we've got though, and most of us would prefer not to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Information necessary for this line of argument is covered in this video.
Most court cases involve very little forensic evidence. Most of the information used in these cases is Eyewitness testimony, which is based on the faulty machinery of the brain. The cases are built on the testimony of people, not fact, but the subjective reality that the witnesses present to the court.
Truth: a verified or indisputable fact. Without forensic evidence, video or the like... there is none of that...
Conclusion, The court system is based on words, not truth.
In a tough economy "eyewitnesses" can be paid _________________ All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin
Joined: Jun 19, 2008 Posts: 7998 Location: Babylon
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject:
I agree with some aspects of the Stand Your Ground law. It gives people who are being bullied the right to defend themselves against attack without facing legal action. That is something I am all for. If someone attacks, I have the right to do what it takes to stop them, imo, without having to face jail time afterward.
However, I don't think that such a law applies here. The kid was walking down the street, not harming a fly, The man had no reason whatsoever to approach him. He had no right to, actually. The kid defended himself against something unknown. He had the right to do that. Zimmerman and the kid can not both be acting against each other in self defense, only one can say that and that would be Martin in this case. If Martin approached Zimmerman and started fighting him, it would be a different matter. There is no evidence the kid sought Zimmerman out, it was the other way around. Therefore, Martin acted in self defense making Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter at the least. _________________ JUST LET THE GUY BE FROM K PAX!!!!!!
Last edited by ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo on Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
i dont understand why the media is so obsessed with this travan martin case.last week in boston in a case known as the mattapan masacre 1 defendent was aquited and the other was given a mistrial.the mattapan masacre ocured in 2010 in the mattapan section of boston where two gunmen killed a mother and her two infant children and the father was shot in the neck and paralyzed.why does the media think the life of one is more important then the four.the real miscarriage of justice was in boston
I admit I've never heard of that case, but those certainly were a couple of insane decisions. Why were the two perpetrators released?
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
there are a couple of factors
one is that the lone surviver and witness was shot in the neck and was to injured to be able to say on the witness stand for sure that the two people in the courtroom were the shooters.you cant be that wounded and be able to recall all those deatails
second the area in boston were this happened was a high crime area and heavely under the control of gangs and witnesses were to afraid of retaliation to be able to come forward.
also with the defendent that got a mistrial there was a 11 to 1 vote in favor of conviction.so a lone holdout could mean a juror was bribed or threatened
3rd unlike the travon martin case,the suspects were black as also were the victims.but with black suspects there was not an outpouring of suport from the civil rights movement.unlike travon martin who the likes of al sharton has advocated for.so for instance had al sharton made a stink to mayor manino maybe witness protection could have been offered to possible witnesses.the suffolk county D.A office vows to re try the second gunmen(the first was aquited)but as time passes memories fade and retrial rarely yield conviction
Joined: Jun 19, 2008 Posts: 7998 Location: Babylon
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:11 pm Post subject:
It seems like stuff that happens in Florida always gets a lot of national media attention for some reason. _________________ JUST LET THE GUY BE FROM K PAX!!!!!!
i dont understand why the media is so obsessed with this travan martin case.last week in boston in a case known as the mattapan masacre 1 defendent was aquited and the other was given a mistrial.the mattapan masacre ocured in 2010 in the mattapan section of boston where two gunmen killed a mother and her two infant children and the father was shot in the neck and paralyzed.why does the media think the life of one is more important then the four.the real miscarriage of justice was in boston
Race plays a role, the new law in Florida plays a role; key probably is that the shooter was provided immunity from being arrested because of the new law.
The media let thousands of cases go unoticed and focuses on the cases, that they determine will provide the most interest to their target audience. It works that way with everything commercialized media does.
Public information sources, that aren't as commercialized, are usually more balanced in their presentation of notable news stories; however some people refer to those shows as boring.
The OJ Simpson case was a perfect example, just another murder case, but since it was a notable public figure, the interest was high, and the media focused constant attention on it.
In this case it's not just a minority individual suspected of not receiving justice; a fairly new controversial law, SYG, is the subject of controversy as well, in the state of Florida, because of this incident.
