June 29, 2013

Trayvon Martin's stepmother Alicia Stanley wants you to know: "I exist... I'm the one... I'm the one...."

You don't see her at the trial where the biological mother sits with the biological father, and she's not the "father's fiancee" whose residence was near where the shooting took place, but she sees herself as Trayvon's real mother.

I don't know who made the decision to keep her in the background. Perhaps the Martin family's lawyers thought there were already too many mother figures in the Trayvon story and decided she should be eclipsed. If so, they should have worked harder to obtain her cooperation, because, as you'll see in the interview — here — she feels aggrieved. She wanted her time in the spotlight, and I'd be interested in knowing the details of the decision of the Anderson Cooper show to put her on. There's a "woman shunned" quality to much of what she says, and I suspect other news shows determined that it's too women's television or too outside the racial justice template.

If you have limited time, begin with Part 2, where Stanley — asked if she thinks Zimmerman "zeroed in" on Martin because of his race — says "I'd be lying if I said yes, so I'm going to say this: no." From there, she goes on to her "I exist... I'm the one... I'm the one..." monologue, which is quite dramatic. I felt like I was watching the Halle Berry performance in the role of Alicia Stanley. I wonder if she had this part scripted in advance and what we see on screen is acting.

I mean, she seems to be saying her lines in the fashion that actresses use when they are bidding for an Oscar, but those actresses are purporting to represent real people. Alicia Stanley may be exactly the kind of real person that actresses will want to study in order to give Oscar-worthy performances. Most real people — like the various witnesses I'd watched in the trial — speak in a rather flat and matter-of-fact style when they're invited to speak on television. You just know that if they made a movie out of this trial, the actors would have to punch up the emotion. Which is why I loathe most courtroom scenes: To avoid blandness, they've got to be phony.

But Alicia Stanley isn't a witness in the courtroom, she's a guest in the comfortable gaze of Anderson Cooper. She's not under oath, but maybe she's utterly genuine. Consider that line: "I'd be lying if I said yes, so I'm going to say this: no." Who answers like that instead of just saying no? A person who consciously and actively decides that not only shouldn't she lie, but she's got to be honest even about considering lying.

62 comments:

bpm4532 said...

Oh the sadness of people buried under the social engineering dream.

Hagar said...

OK, correction then: Martin's stepmother is the only one to mourn him.

Now this woman being "found" this late in the story is a surprise. How did this happen?

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

There goes lib-Althouse pushing this abomination in front of us God fearing cons. Will she ever move on?

BTW, we hate his sin, be not him.

pm317 said...

From part 2, she is the woman who raised him but not the woman who lived in Zimmerman's complex that the dad was with and where the guy got killed. OK good, we got that straightened out.

Phil 3:14 said...

I knew there was a women's angle to this story.

Achilles said...

Progressives destroyed the black family. On purpose. They keep them in shitty public schools to keep them ignorant. On purpose. Every now and they rile them up and give them a white man to hate.

This whining is pathetic. Call a spade a spade. The true racism is coming from the left in an obvious attempt to keep black people on the plantation.

Unknown said...

Needs moar sad.

madAsHell said...

She's going to write a book about raising Trayvon, and the values she instilled in him. She wants to be on Oprah.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Another greedy piece of trash trying to cash in.

Heckuva a job raising the little thug.

The more I learn about the Martin family, and the more that comes out in trial about exactly what Trayvon did that night, the happier I am that he is room temperature.

William said...

I saw part of the interview. It looks like she had an expensive make over. She had the appearance of someone who was sophisticated and articulate. However, in the interview, she sounded kind of "hood" (a word I just recently learned). The part I saw was softball. Cooper didn't ask her about Trayvon's past run ins with the law, and she went on about how kind and gentle Trayvon was. The interview established that Trayvon loved babies.

Rhythm and Balls said...

This could have all been avoided had George simply done the proper thing and worn his blue uniform.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

I think the subliminal message is, I'm the stepmom and I'm a normal woman like you women on the jury. I don't believe my son son started the fight that got him killed, but I'm not watching the trial because it is just too painful, and I trust you to get it right.

P.S. don't blame me, or by extension my son, for the race baiting, because they cut me out of all that.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Youn can also read between the lines and conclude that CNN is disgusted with the race baiting Piers Morgan, and is quietly training George Stroumboulopoulos to take his place.

AprilApple said...

If only Trevon Martin wasn't a punk criminal who smashed Zimmerman's head into the ground. This whole thing could have been avoided.

Neighborhood watch? Screw that. The police are the only ones who can help. Everyone else must let the hooded punks do what they want.

somefeller said...

Youn can also read between the lines and conclude that CNN is disgusted with the race baiting Piers Morgan, and is quietly training George Stroumboulopoulos to take his place.

If there's one thing the left and the right can agree upon, on both sides if the Atlantic, it is that Piers Morgan is loathsome.

Sorun said...

The world's most useless character witness is the mother. Why even bother.

edutcher said...

One presumes CNN is going to try to find a way to make their role in ginning this thing up into a frenzy look a little softer.

Ann Althouse said...

There's a "woman shunned" quality to much of what she says

I'd heard of the woman scorned, but not the woman shunned.

Freeman Hunt said...

So this guy's dad wasn't with the kid's mom, and he wasn't with the kid's bonded stepmom, he was with some other woman who was going to become a new stepmom?

Way to go providing some stability in your kid's life, dad.

edutcher said...

PS A prop for Anderson Cooper.

After GLAAD goes all Gloria Steinbrenner over Alec Baldwin's latest spaz attack, Cooper is having none of it.

OK, maybe he wants anybody who slanders homosexuals crucified, but at least he says being a crazed Lefty shouldn't get you a pass.

Browndog said...

Still, no mention from the media of Tracy Martin, (former) gang banger father of former gang banger in training, Trayvon Martin.

Bet not many are aware of this:

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/07/14/update-33-trayvon-martin-shooting-the-bloom-is-off-the-ruse-the-gang-connections/

Rhythm and Balls said...

So this guy's dad wasn't with the kid's mom, and he wasn't with the kid's bonded stepmom, he was with some other woman who was going to become a new stepmom?

Way to go providing some stability in your kid's life, dad.


Clearly not the best argument for killing someone but hey, whatever floats your boat.

edutcher said...

I think he's saying this is a seminal problem in the black community.

You're the one saying it's an excuse to kill him.

edutcher said...

s/b she.

fat fingers.

Cedarford said...

Sorun said...
The world's most useless character witness is the mother. Why even bother.

=================
Because it is a liberal/progressive jewish media ritual.
They love it.
Especially with black mommas.

"Touquoises done be a good boy. I don't care hows you think he killed 5 people in day store by putting a cap in the back up they haids. No, dat person in the store video ain't my son no way, no how. My son is an angel and he suffered all his life cause the government barely gave us 'nuff to live on. "

Freeman Hunt said...

Clearly not the best argument for killing someone...

Good thing it wasn't presented as an argument for killing someone then.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Good thing it wasn't presented as an argument for killing someone then.

I know. Just the next natural topic of conversation in a series of posts on character witnesses in a 2nd-degree murder trial involving a minor.

James said...

Still, no mention from the media of Tracy Martin, (former) gang banger father of former gang banger in training, Trayvon Martin.

I'm glad you mentioned this because I haven't been really interested in the case so I've missed many details. However, in Rachel Jeantel's testimony she mentioned several times she assumed "his daddy would help him" (meaning that if a fight broke out Trayvon could count on his father to help him beat Zimmerman).

Now knowing a bit about Tracy Martin's background puts Jeantel's comment in context.

Lyle said...

Three mothers is one too may to pay off.

She may also have some wits about her, which the lawyer Crump might find unhelpful.

Dante said...

Consider that line: "I'd be lying if I said yes, so I'm going to say this: no." Who answers like that instead of just saying no? A person who consciously and actively decides that not only shouldn't she lie, but she's got to be honest even about considering lying.

Perhaps she is saying this to explain why she is saying this to her friends and others who are listening. These folks want a lynching, and she has to tell them, look, I'm saying it wasn't racial, because I have to tell the truth.

Rabel said...

Cooper:

"The defense is trying to make it sound like Trayvon Martin is introducing race into this situation. Is that something you think is fair?"

The fact that Anderson was not struck by lightening is proof positive that God is dead.

Rhythm and Balls said...

So the commenting community is in agreement, then? Zimmerman did society a favor by killing off a "former gang banger in training", right?

Rabel said...

As for "acting", well no. But I understand the confusion. I have the same problem making heads or tails of reports on Japanese pop culture. Haven't been there. Haven't done that.

Aridog said...

Achilles ... your comment at 10:49 AM is on the money, but no one on the progressive side will ever admit it.

It is pitiful that Rachel Jeantel is a Junior in High School, from what I have heard, and is mostly illiterate. Heck, she can barely speak English, and hasn't much command of Ebonics either...so she mumbles. In America . Today. WTF?

edutcher said...

Rabel said...

Cooper:

"The defense is trying to make it sound like Trayvon Martin is introducing race into this situation. Is that something you think is fair?"

The fact that Anderson was not struck by lightening is proof positive that God is dead.


Very droll, dear.

Rhythm and Balls said...

So the commenting community is in agreement, then? Zimmerman did society a favor by killing off a "former gang banger in training", right?

Apparently you think he did.

Dante said...

A little more thought on this.

"I'd be lying if I said yes, so I'm going to say this: no."

There was a question to Goodman, a reluctant witness who wanted to remain anonymous, about calling 9/11. (I linked to it in last night's Cafe). In trying to determine the state of the guys mind, the defense lawyer said something to the effect of "It's not as if you may have ever called 9/11 before."

Goodman responded with something to the effect that, before then, no, after then, a lot.

I read this man is being intimidated by someone. And I'll bet I know who. And now his life is potentially in danger because he said he saw Trayvon Martin on top raining down blows in the dominant "Ground and Pound" position on Zimmerman.

If that's the society in which Martin's bio mom comes forward, she has to excuse her non-aligned message "I don't think it was racial," so as to protect herself. In this case by excusing her statement by saying she had to tell the truth.

jr565 said...

Ritmo wrote:
This could have all been avoided had George simply done the proper thing and worn his blue uniform.

Except he wasn't on duty that night.

kentuckyliz said...

Legal Insurrection is a great place to follow trial coverage, and the live-tweet stream of @LawSelfDefense. Great commentariat there. Bunch of real attorneys. I'm shutting up and not cracking jokes, because I am too busy reading and learning.

kentuckyliz said...

Good's identity was outed in court. Given TM's dad's gang tat on his neck, I would think he is in great danger. Moreso now than ever before.

Does the state have to provide security and protection to witnesses in danger?

I feel sorry for this guy. He just tried to do the right thing. All the women hid and he stepped out and spoke up.

It is almost an object lesson: refuse to be a witness, for your own sake. If you saw something, pretend you didn't.

Dante said...

I feel sorry for this guy. He just tried to do the right thing. All the women hid and he stepped out and spoke up.

Me too. Obviously he is in danger, as he has called 9/11 many times since. It's also interesting in his testimony how he spoke quite "literally." In this case, much the same as the Bio Mom who says it would be a lie.

Thin protection from people who don't care about the truth.

Rhythm and Balls said...

It's good to know how pure the motives of the Zimmerman defense are.

If I were more like some of the commenters here, I'd ask what kind of a family raises people like that.

Jeff Teal said...

Just now checked into Tracy Martins background.Interesting cover-up of tattoos.Even more interesting is how the Traydaddy was so po'ed by uis kid after the suspension.Witness intimidation and manipulation now certainly seems more likely.Talk about unholy alliance between BDLR Crump and Traydaddy.

Ficta said...

"I wonder if she had this part scripted in advance and what we see on screen is acting."

Maybe it's less calculated. This makes me think of Joan Didion's essay "Some Dreamers of the Golden Dream" where she claims that Americans have begun (well, many years ago now) to pattern their lives and speech to resemble movies. Lurid movies.

somefeller said...

Maybe it's less calculated. This makes me think of Joan Didion's essay "Some Dreamers of the Golden Dream" where she claims that Americans have begun (well, many years ago now) to pattern their lives and speech to resemble movies. Lurid movies.

The reality is probably less calculated and less lurid. We live in a media-saturated culture. It's easy for people to visualize themselves on camera and they speak accordingly. Also, home video usage has made the idea of being recorded on camera a regular part of life for a couple of decades now. For a little evidence of this, look how awkward and stilted people look and sound in early TV or newsreel "man on the street" interviews compared to now.

jr565 said...

Ritmo wrote:
"It's good to know how pure the motives of the Zimmerman defense are.

If I were more like some of the commenters here, I'd ask what kind of a family raises people like that."


Yawn.

Dante said...

It's good to know how pure the motives of the Zimmerman defense are.

You mean because of the "Stupid" tweet? That's the daughter of the defense. What's that got to do with the defense?

Regarding whether Diamond is stupid or merely ignorant, who cares. She lied and perjured herself for her own motives. Compare that to Goodman's testimony. A man who is clearly fearful for his safety.

If you haven't figured it out, what's going on in that courtroom is vile. And it's not the defense. It's the prosecution that seems to be building a theory that unless you have brain damage, your life is not in danger.

Certainly, not being ground and pounded by some young punk, who told you he's going to kill you.

Dante said...

Also, R&B,

How do you compare what West's daughter did to what your liberal Press did to Zimmerman. Which one is worse?

By now, all of you know about the shooting of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, FL, by Hispanic George Zimmerman. Well, the “Lean Forward” network, MSNBC, offered up a news story with a Dowdified quote. Via Big Journalism:

“This guy looks like he’s up to no good … he looks black,” Zimmerman told a police dispatcher from his car. His father has said that Zimmerman is Hispanic, grew up in a multiracial family, and is not racist.



So, it’s clear that Zimmerman equates “suspicious” with “black”, right? Um…not exactly:

ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he’s up to no good, [begin ellipsis] or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

911 DISPATCHER: Okay, is this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic? [end ellipsis]

ZIMMERMAN: He looks black.

SukieTawdry said...

Perhaps she wants her time in the spotlight. Perhaps she's also aggrieved at being left out of the Justice for Trayvon Martin Foundation, the Trayvon Martin Family Trust, the two trademarks, various and sundry fundraising events, etc.

Rhythm and Balls said...

You mean because of the "Stupid" tweet? That's the daughter of the defense. What's that got to do with the defense?

What's Martin's family and their statements got to do with whatever transpired on the evening in question?

Oh, that's right. It's only the topic of the actual post you're commenting on.

Rhythm and Balls said...

So now I've got to wonder if a Breitbart operation would refrain from twisting more things out of context than MSNBC. Hmmm... tough to say.

avwh said...

Do we know how much money the Martin family has already ginned up from Trayvon's death (and fame)? Must expect to cash in a LOT if they've trademarked his name.

Dante said...

What's Martin's family and their statements got to do with whatever transpired on the evening in question?

I didn't decide on the topic of this post. It seems not related to what transpired, but more the drama around the event.

However, I would say In General parents have a lot more to do with how their kids turn out, than their kids do on their parents.

So using that, I would say the parents have more to do with what transpired than the daughter has to do with the way West conducts the defense.

Rhythm and Balls said...

However, I would say In General parents have a lot more to do with how their kids turn out, than their kids do on their parents.

So In General (sic) the daughter's tasteless and callous tweet reflects the nature of those, like her father, defending Zimmerman. Got it.

Rhythm and Balls said...

From an item related in no way to this case other than the fact that it was also reported in the New York Daily News, weird things happen in Wisconsin.

Just in case we wanted to point out something weird in Wisconsin on this blog.

Dante said...

So In General (sic) the daughter's tasteless and callous tweet reflects the nature of those, like her father, defending Zimmerman. Got it.

I didn't say that. That's your non sequitur.

And I find the leftist press' deceitful splice of Zimmerman's statement far more disgusting, in many ways.

Rhythm and Balls said...

It's not a non sequitur. It's a direct analogy.

Dante said...

It's not a non sequitur. It's a direct analogy.

It does not follow that because a child has a trait the parent also has it.

Rhythm and Balls said...

1. You don't know what a non-sequitur is. It's not whether the internal logic of a comparison "follows" it's own premise. It's whether it follows that accusations of flaws of Martin's upbringing/the "left" could be compared to flaws of the upbringing of those defending Zimmerman on the "right". As reality could have it, they can.

2. Your internal logic, that flaws of parent and child are not necessarily inherited or taught, applies equally to the discussion here. Whatever your commenters don't like about his stepmother can't be assumed to have "trickled down" to or influenced Martin.

3. Why do I have to explain all this? Isn't it obvious?

Good night.

Dante said...

You don't know what a non-sequitur is

Is that so? You are the one who claimed:

"Because children's traits are influenced by parents, the parents have those traits," not me.

See, traits aren't symmetrical.

Your logic flaw is that because A => B does not mean that B => A. Here, it means because children inherit traits from their parents does not mean a trait in a child implies it in the parent. See, that's your non-sequitur.

What do you do for a living to claim this? Or are you simply trying to focus attention on the hang nail as opposed amputated, bleeding arm, because this case is another example of Leftists going wild to hang white people?

Rhythm and Balls said...

"Because children's traits are influenced by parents, the parents have those traits,"

You claim to quote me directly with a statement that is nowhere to be found in this thread except in your preceding post.

Delusional.

Your logic flaw is that because A => B does not mean that B => A. Here, it means because children inherit traits from their parents does not mean a trait in a child implies it in the parent. See, that's your non-sequitur.

I never claimed it did (again, not the point). You are also mistaken in not getting that the point was A => B, therefore it's possible that B <= A.

What do you do for a living to claim this? Or are you simply trying to focus attention on the hang nail as opposed amputated, bleeding arm, because this case is another example of Leftists going wild to hang white people?

Pot, kettle, black. And you're still not getting the point. And this has become boring.

Get a hobby. Good night.

Dante said...

R&B: It's pretty clear you don't understand what you wrote. Like Rosie O'Donnell, you can not be reasoned with.

kentuckyliz said...

GZ only mentioned race after the dispatcher asked for a description. He mentioned it a second time when he could confirm it because TM was circling his vehicle. He was confirming the detail.

In the other GZ calls, he never volunteers the race; the dispatcher's first question is always, "Is s/he Black, Hispanic, or White?" I find that terribly discriminatory against Asians and Native Americans. The dispatchers need diversity training. They are obsessed with race and not inclusive of all categories.

Dad Vocacy said...

Child support and Visitation are two separate issues, and both are considered a right that belongs to the child. One parent can't withhold visitation because of nonsupport and vice versa. Only a judge can order support to be stopped. Good advice is to continue paying your support in order to avoid contempt charges for non-payment of support.
Lawyers specializing in fathers Right