In the days and weeks to come, Trayvon Martin would be remembered as an easygoing young man who had simply gone to the store for some candy and a drink. And George Zimmerman would go into hiding, amid hundreds of death threats against him and his family. Both would become rhetorical devices in the heated, never-ending national disagreements about race and guns.Both would become rhetorical devices in the heated, never-ending national disagreements about race and guns....
All that lay ahead. For now, the neighborhood watch coordinator stood under the bright sun that had replaced the previous night’s obscuring rain and told his side of a two-sided story about standing ground, and losing it.
Thanks to the NYT for stepping back and observing that rather than operating as a participant in the use and exploitation of these 2 unfortunate men.
IN THE COMMENTS: Jay says:
The NYT and the "outraged" race hustlers have done nothing but try to exploit this incident to further thier agenda's. They are now "backing down" or at least back pedaling, because the available facts are really not supporting the narrative...I'm complimenting the NYT for doing the right thing now, but I acknowledge — and thought about this as I wrote the original post — that it may have ulterior motives along these lines.
In another two weeks the NYT will start reprinting Saint Trayvon's ganksta wannabe tweets in an effort to solidify the Hispanic vote for Obama...
IN THE COMMENTS 2: rhhardin said:
It's the "there is no truth" copout when it goes against them.Tully said:
The NYT walkback is strong evidence of a losing narrative. They don't abandon their cherished narratives easily. If they thought continuing the narrative would be helpful rather than hurtful to the liberal cause, they would still be running it on page one with daily assorted op-eds.PatCA said:
I think the motive for the Times is that the lies from the media have been so egregious that even they are ashamed.
NBC doctoring the 911 call, ABC denying Zimmerman's injuries. Awful.
पोस्ट्स
१०९ टिप्पण्या:
...heated, never-ending national disagreements...
Paraphrasing a favorite son of Wisconsin, it's never over until the New York Times says it's over.
It's the "there is no truth" copout when it goes against them.
The NYT and the "outraged" race hustlers have done nothing but try to exploit this incident to further thier agenda's.
They are now "backing down" or at least back pedaling, because the available facts are really not supporting the narrative. Example:
ABC News has re-digitized video of George Zimmerman taken shortly after Trayvon Martin’s shooting.
The video was unveiled as an exclusive this morning on “Good Morning America.” ABC was the first news organization to show the original tape.
Reporter Matt Gutman said the clearer video shows “what appear to be a pair of gashes or welts on George Zimmerman’s head.”
And remember, a scant two weeks ago, the narrative was that the innocent teen was gunned down for merely "looking suspicious" by wearing a hoodie.
In another two weeks the NYT will start reprinting Saint Trayvon's ganksta wannabe tweets in an effort to solidify the Hispanic vote for Obama...
Trayvon's parents were on Fox News last night with Geraldo.
They are not the problem. They only want the cover up to come to an end.
That sounds fair to me.
I may have mentioned this, but CNN did a poll (Demos 30%, Republicans 25%) showing that, week before last, those who thought Zimmerman should be arrested was 73%.
After a week of facts coming out, it had dropped to 48%.
Given how the poll was skewed, the real drop must be greater.
I'm willing to bet that's why we're all talking about the Buffett Rule again this morning.
Damn, but the Lefties are on a cold streak.
Guess people are wising up.
Claiming martyrdom has been a successful political tactic. Check out Horst Wessel.
Trayvon was an easygoing gangsta wif gold teef.
"They only want the cover up to come to an end."
Dude, seriously? What cover up?
I am hoping the cover up around the conspiracy to keep money out of my checking account will end. WHEN WILL IT END??
The only thing the race grifters and the house organs of the democratic party have insured is that if Zimmerman were charged with a murder or manslaughter charge he will never get tried in Florida because any half competent defense lawyer will argue there is no venue in Florida that he could receive a fair trail.
"Crowds Smaller Than Predicted At Trayvon Rally..."
That, from Drudge, is very good news. It indicates that the riots I predicted might just not take place. I hope my predictions were wrong.
The best antidote to all this would have been if the mayor of Sanford had overruled the lawyers and ordered the police department to release everything they had on the incident when the story first broke.
"All the news that is fit to spin now but revise later after we see the public opinion polls"
Trayvon Martin would be remembered as an easygoing young man
From what I've seen of his online presence, he was an angry, confrontational, vulgar, pothead. (Pretty much a normal teenager, but certainly not easygoing.)
"The best antidote to all this would have been if the mayor of Sanford had overruled the lawyers and ordered the police department to release everything they had on the incident when the story first broke."
-- That's a great way to encourage the witnesses who talked to the police. They are staying anonymous because they know that being known is bad. Heck, just having the same last name as Zimmerman gets your address tweeted and death threats.
There's no need for witnesses to have to go public, and there's now a witness saying he saw Zimmerman the next day bandaged up.
More failure of the narrative:
But at his death, Martin was 17 years old, around 6 feet tall and, according to his family's attorney, about 140 pounds.
Zimmerman, 28, is best known from a 7-year-old booking photo of an apparently heavyset figure with an imposing stare, pierced ear and facial hair, the orange collar of his jail uniform visible. The picture, released by police following the deadly shooting, was taken after Zimmerman's 2005 arrest on an assault-on-an-officer charge that was eventually dropped.
In a police video made public this week of Zimmerman being brought in for questioning a half-hour after the shooting, the 5-foot-9 man appears much slimmer.
More & more failure of the narrative:
Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.
"I saw George. He was banged up. His head had two big bandages, that weren't flat, had a bump on them," the neighbor, who did not want to be identified, said.
He described where the injuries were.
"I seen him have a big bandage on his nose and his nose swollen. On the side, where his eyes were at, it was swollen," he said.
"Saint Trayvon's ganksta wannabe tweets..."
Stop it. Not cool.
I don't know enough about global warming to make an informed judgement. I do know that its proponents oversell their case and act with blatant hypocrisy. Something similar is going on with this case. I don't know if Zimmerman is 100% innocent, but there is no reason to believe that he is a racist or that Trayvon was killed simply because he was black. The tactics that are being used to demonize Zimmerman and his familly are far worse than any prosecutorial lapses in the investigation.....Perhaps Trayvon profiled Zimmerman as a flabby Hispanic who had no business getting his face and needed a beat down. That's just as likely as Zimmerman profiling Trayvon, but no sane person would ever say that aloud on television.
B.S., Matthew
There is no need to release witnesses names, and in any case, I was thinking more of the (unedited) 911 and surveillance tapes, the EMT treatment report (which we still have not seen, the actual locations and timeline, etc.
Just like the Brewer - Obama flap, where 1/2 black trumps 100% woman. The Florida case, Black trumps Hispanic. For now.
I would guess that Obama needs to court Hispanic vote alot more than he needs to convince Blacks to vote for him.
Sorry thugs, you don't get to administer free, safe beatdowns. You takes your chances.
This kind of detailed in-depth reporting is why the NYT is one of our best newspapers. Interesting that we still do not know the powder burn evidence--
Also B.S., William
Zimmermann and Martin were not public officials and were free to "profile" to their hearts' content if they wanted to.
Reminder: We don't know what we don't know. None of this information is "evidence."
You don't know what you aren't hearing. You aren't getting the full scope of evidence. Modesty is a good. Hubris is bad.
Facts are stubborn things. Wait for the trial.
Also the proffered narrative:
"this is what African Americans have to live with - the fear of being shot by a white man just because we're in their neighborhood!"
- doesn't carry a large impact given that the same so-called leaders seem to put up with far higher rates of black to black violence with nary a peep.
Shouldn't we feel equally sorry for all violence on African American young males?
And any root cause solution or Pareto driven response would start with the black on black violence.
So, at the least, all the 'outrage' is a poor allocation of resources.
And at the worse it is not about violence on blacks at all, but is about about a thirst for political power and all that goes with it.
"This kind of detailed in-depth reporting is why the NYT is one of our best newspapers."
-- A flowery restatement of facts that blogs already had organized is "detailed in-depth reporting"?
Chuck66 said...
"I would guess that Obama needs to court Hispanic vote alot more than he needs to convince Blacks to vote for him."
I think this is exactly right. The longer this controversy drags on, the more Obama can wave goodby to electoral votes from Florida, New Mexico, Colorado or Nevada.
Steve Sailer had an interesting, Thomas Wolfe-esque take on this. He imagined putting Trayvon's girlfriend on the stand and under cross-examination getting her to admit that Trayvon confronted Zimmerman because he felt sexually threatened by the man following him down a dark street. It's just as plausible as any other theory given that we know of the disdain in the African-American community for homosexuals.
Of course the counter-narrative can break down as well.
Trayvon Martin shooting: It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say
The facts are still coming in, as are the opinions of experts, real and imagined.
Both would become rhetorical devices in the heated, never-ending national disagreements about race and guns....
This is the same type of "logic" used to suspend both students for fighting when one of them was attacked unprovoked and was defending himself.
This is the CLASSIC "Moral Equivalence" argument of the leftwinger.
It is used to excuse the true offenders, the afro-vigilante crowd and their self-hating white enablers, from being solely in the wrong in fomenting violence against a person, solely because of the color of his skin.
NOTHING is said by any of these racist assholes about the vastly greater number of black kids killed by other black kids. EVER. EVER!
They can go fuck themselves.
Its Civility Bullshit on Ice and Stilts, with a Sparkler jammed up its ass.
Note this from the end of the story I just linked:
"I believe that's Trayvon Martin in the background, without a doubt," Primeau says, stressing that the tone of the voice is a giveaway. "That's a young man screaming."
He makes a judgement call that the voice calling for help is Martin even though he doesn't have a voice sample of Martin. It is just a process of elimination.
Both that expert and the other seem to be on more solid ground claiming that the voice is not Zimmerman's. But that's why we have trials....
I don't think everyone there got the memo:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/opinion/sunday/a-native-caste-society.html?_r=1&src=rechp
A study released in 2006 by Duke University on attitudes on race in Durham, N.C., a city with one of the fastest-growing Latino populations in the country, found that an overwhelming majority of Latinos — 78 percent — felt they had the most in common with whites, while 53 percent of them felt they had the least in common with blacks.
Someone is trying to drive a wedge. It remains to be seen if they'll continue to do so.
My guess is that Ms. Althouse is not reading the Dead Tree version of the Times; if she were, she would have no doubt that the Times is dialing it back.
They include a column by Bill Keller ruminating about hate crimes, the Rutgers suicide, and Trayvon Martin. He mentions Spike Lee's Tweeting of a Zimmerman address as a sign of how things are spinning out of control.
And in the Business Section, David Carr talks about how social media have the Trayvon case spinning out of control. This leads to the second reporting by the Times of the Spike Lee incident.
Bursting out of the cocoon like that must be tough for Times readers.
Tom Maguire
can't read between lines huh icepick?
the Times is trying to help you.
The NYT is simply a conduit for liberal narratives. Nothing more.
NBC deliberately edited the 911 tape to fit this narrative.
So much for liberals saying there exists no bias in the media.
The MSM has become the marketing arm of the democrat party. No longer are they overseers. "Freedom of the press" has been corrupted, completely.
he will never get tried in Florida because any half competent defense lawyer will argue there is no venue in Florida that he could receive a fair trail. -cubanbob
They'll have to change the venue and get the Kalahari Bushmen to be on the jury at this point.
And any root cause solution or Pareto driven response would start with the black on black violence.
The most effective response we’ve had to those who initiate violence seems to be locking the perpetrators up and keeping them locked up. That and letting people shoot them in self-defense.
One bruised Zimmerman trumps two voice experts, even if they are right, which we'll never know.
the NYT used to be one of our best papers IMHO.
They'll have to change the venue and get the Kalahari Bushmen to be on the jury at this point.
OOOOO...no you di'n't.
can't read between lines huh icepick?
You then reference the NYT. But I'm referencing an article in the Orlando Sentinel. Reading comprehension fail on your part. So sorry, please try again when you grow some functioning synapses.
And, on another, not unrelated front, it comes out Big Sis warned us all about men in hoodies.
Icepick said...
Of course the counter-narrative can break down as well.
Trayvon Martin shooting: It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say
And how many times have "experts" been wrong?
Or disagreed with other "experts"?
m stone, I'm not claiming anything other than that it has been reported that two voice print experts are stating that in their judgement that is not George Zimmerman calling for help on one particular 911 call. I am making no other claims. The only additional claim ONE of the experts reportedly makes is that it is Trayvon Martin calling for help. As I pointed out, that is merely an inference and not a conclusive call on his part.
Icepick
We have an eyewitness who identified Zimmerman calling for help.
I'm extremely skeptical of 'experts' being able to determine who was yelling several yards away from a phone call. There are just too many variables involved.
icepick, what is it when you fail to recognize what I'm referencing?
Rialby...the coverup that he Martins related included no police calling them until the next day and still saying their son was a John Doe body for three days.
Also several witnesses were push-polled by the police the night it happened suggesting to interviwed witnesses that the man in the red jacket was being beaten by the skinny kid, right?
When their answers were not what the police wanted to hear, those interviews were tossed out as unreliable. Let's hear the audio tapes the police made of those intrviews.
The voice analsis is certain that the screams which were stopped by a gunshot were made by the dead teen and not by the shooter.
A witness heard the shot and looked back up from his 911 call to see the heavy set hispanic man getting off the skinny teen's face down body.
Maybe that still amounts to a black thug burglar who deserves what he got for challenging authority.
But to me it smells like an intentional cover up of a stupid Zimmerman. It also looks like diplomatic immunity in action.
Fortunately it does not look like is racism so much as it looks like a free pass for a well meaning profiler's mistakes.
Why mess up two lives? Right? We can't bring Trayvon back. So it became Cover Up City. And that cover up alone is what is fueling the racial angle.
Wow, the stupid is really out in force on this topic. edutcher, why do you think I mentioned a trial? Might it be so that evidence could be examined, challenged and judged on its merits in a court room?
My broader point is that not all the evidence is out, nor has it all been examined thoroughly (ABC News finally got arouind to admitting what anyone with any sense already knew, which was that their grainy surveillance video was grainy!) and certianly none of it has been brought before a court in a trial setting. In other words, rushing to judge George Zimmerman innocent is as stupid as rushing to judge him guilty.
yes, and the eyewitness was also in the dark, in the rain and possibly didn't know one man's voice from another. Did the eyewitness know either of these two men before this? Eyewitness testimony has been known to fail, too.
I actually don't have an opinion on who was calling for help. I am merely pointing out that there is some dispute.
We have Zimmerman stating that he was calling for help.
We have Martin's father claiming it was his son's voice calling for help. (And this story in itself is clouded by a dispute between Martin's father and the Sanford PD.)
We have an eyewitness who claims that it was Zimmerman calling for help.
We have audio experts, at least one of who has put at least one person in jail for murder by his testimony, who claim it cannot be Zimmerman's voice calling for help.
In other words, it is a matter of contention.
And has anyone conclusively proved that it is only one person calling for help? Could both people involved (or even a third party) be on the tape? How would you prove that? The use of voice experts?
The NYT is also backing off of the 'White Hispanic' label. Now George is just Hispanic.
The writer also seems pretty aghast at Stand Your Ground, an 'assertive' law that makes it 'harder for prosecutors to make arrests' etc. This is followed by examples of how Stand Your Ground has failed; it 'needs a second look.' No examples given of how Stand Your Ground saved lives, or saved someone from being a crime victim. Just sit tight and wait for Nurse Bloomberg to save the day.
You know, it is possible to talk about this matter without getting into the vices or virtues of either the deceased Mr. Martin or the surviving Mr. Zimmerman.
The actual case should be dealt with with deliberation and fairness; which as some have observed, is what the parents of Mr. Martin seem to be saying.
Meanwhile there is a circus going on all around this. We can't talk about that? We can't call out the bad actors there?
The behavior of the media is typical; they stir things up according to a predictable narrative, then try to clean their skirts. Down the road, watch them claim with the usual unctuousness, how fair and penetrating their coverage really was.
The President's conduct I cannot praise.
The conduct of Revs. Jackson and Sharpton I find difficult to describe adequately and politely. They need to go home and shut up.
A point our president could make but chooses not to make.
The President might also have made the point that the rest of us--including him--do not know the facts, cannot and should not attempt to judge the situation from afar, through the lens of emotion.
In his statement, icepick said 2 experts said the cry for help was not Zimmerman's (something he's been pushing here). The last gasp, it would seem, of the Zimmerman Is A Murderer crowd.
As I said, "experts" have often disagreed or have been shown to be wrong.
He said nothing about a trial until his second comment when he assumes the "young man" is Martin.
Well, at least he caught himself saying something dumb and tried to recover, but, given he's the one who snarked, "The facts are still coming in, as are the opinions of experts, real and imagined", he'd do well to moderate himself.
The stupid is coming out in force, alright.
icepick: "rushing to judge George Zimmerman innocent is as stupid as rushing to judge him guilty."
Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty? Stupid
traditional guy wrote: Rialby...the coverup that he Martins related included no police calling them until the next day and still saying their son was a John Doe body for three days.
From an Orlando Sentinel story trying to separate fact from fiction:
The Volusia County Medical Examiner refused to release Trayvon's body to his family for three days, an unusually long wait.
Not true, according to the medical examiner. It picked up the body at the scene just after 10 p.m. Feb. 26 and notified a Fort Lauderdale funeral home 39 hours later that the body was ready. The funeral home, Roy Mizell and Kurtz, did not pick up the body for an additional 24 hours, the medical examiner reported.
Volusia County spokesman David Byron said it would be impossible to find out the average length of time the medical examiner there keeps bodies, but said it can vary by several days, depending on circumstances — for example, if there's a dispute among family members about what to do.
Dr. Jan Garavaglia, medical examiner for Orange and Osceola Counties, said her office generally releases bodies in 24 to 36 hours.
The Medical Examiner's Office in Monroe County — the Florida Keys — said the average there is five days.
So, traditionalguy, you are completely fucking up the facts of the case. Again. Which makes your post traditional, for you. I won't bother going into the rest of it.
NBC deliberately edited the 911 tape to fit this narrative.
Shiloh will come in here pointing out that the very act of protesting NBC's malicious behavior is racism. In fact, Ann's continued posting about this topic is just chum for the hillbillies, right-wing circle jerk.
You see, NBC is race-baiting but to point it out is race-baiting.
/shiloh logic-san
Rialby...the coverup that he Martins related included no police calling them until the next day and still saying their son was a John Doe body for three days.
Really? Because according to the Neighborhood Notification the police put out the day after the shooting, they identified the body, the morning after the shooting. It doesn’t seem unreasonable that it took until the next morning to locate someone who could identify the body of someone who didn’t normally live in the area where the shooting took place.
Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty? Stupid.
That's in a court of law, Shit-for-brains. Or do you think that the Althouse comment section is a legally seated jury with jurisdiction over Sanford Florida? And most of you seem willing to judge Martin guilty of at least assault when that hasn't been proven either.
The NYT walkback is strong evidence of a losing narrative. They don't abandon their cherished narratives easily. If they thought continuing the narrative would be helpful rather than hurtful to the liberal cause, they would still be running it on page one with daily assorted op-eds.
traditionalguy said...
Rialby...the coverup that he Martins related included no police calling them until the next day and still saying their son was a John Doe body for three days.
Um, the police came to see Martin with a photo of his son when Mr. Martin called them the next day to report his son missing.
From the New York Times:
Early next morning, no sign of Trayvon, still. Mr. Martin called his son’s cellphone, which again went to voice mail. He then repeatedly called the cousin until he answered, only to share the distressing news that he had not seen Trayvon.
Now it was Mr. Martin calling 911. He reported that his son was missing, and then described what his son was wearing. Soon he was outside, meeting a couple of responding police officers. One of them took out a photograph of a body from a folder.
You silly little liar.
Your "John Doe" assertion is laughable, given that Treyvon Martin was identified by his father by 10am the morning after the shooting.
You are a total embarrassment on this matter.
aditionalguy said...
Also several witnesses were push-polled by the police the night it happened suggesting to interviwed witnesses that the man in the red jacket was being beaten by the skinny kid, right?
When their answers were not what the police wanted to hear, those interviews were tossed out as unreliable. Let's hear the audio tapes the police made of those intrviews.
Your "John Doe" assertion was laughable and false.
So is this iditiotic drivel.
Please provide a link to a news account, or other source showing the police "tossed out" witness statements.
Really, I can't wait to read all about it.
"Meanwhile there is a circus going on all around this. We can't talk about that? We can't call out the bad actors there?"
Talking about the media is not a moral problem. It's substantially different from smearing people. I don't understand why people not involved in the investigation are so sure they know what happened that night.
But talking about the media phenomenon is completely different then, say, talking about the kid and his tweets.
I think the motive for the Times is that the lies from the media have been so egregious that even they are ashamed.
NBC doctoring the 911 call, ABC denying Zimmerman's injuries. Awful.
were on Fox News last night with Geraldo.
Oh god that was pathetic pandering by Geraldo.
And FOX is still using the picture of Martin as a 12 yr old. Idiots.
Canuck:
It's more fun, I guess, to imagine we're watching an episode of "Judge Judy."
We have audio experts,
We? Who is we? Your "side"? Democrats? Race-hustlers?
who claim it cannot be Zimmerman's voice calling for help.
Wrong. They claim its only a 48% match. Which makes sense, because to do a reliable voice analysis, you need to get the subject to provide his voice saying the same thing you are testing against and in the same pitch. Which your "experts" didn't do.
Also, you MSM source used TWELVE experts and only gave print to two. Guess why?
But I'm referencing an article in the Orlando Sentinel.
You should know better than to reference a media outlet on this.
It the most biased media reporting I've seen since the CBS Memo hoax.
"It's more fun, I guess, to imagine we're watching an episode of "Judge Judy.""
yeah. I guess it's another episode of Nancy Grace.
Icepick,
those "experts" would not have any credibility to testify in court on this case. Note:
The software compared that audio to Zimmerman's voice [presumably from the Zimerman 911 call]. It returned a 48 percent match. Owen said to reach a positive match with audio of this quality, he'd expect higher than 90 percent.
"As a result of that, you can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it's not Zimmerman," Owen says, stressing that he cannot confirm the voice as Trayvon's, because he didn't have a sample of the teen's voice to compare.
I believe a 48% "match" (whatever that is) isn't really a good standard a prosecutor would want to present to a jury...
Canuck:
You gave me an idea!
Remember "Celebrity Death Match"?
I propose Nancy Grace and Al Sharpton; Jesse Jackson goes up against Gloria Allred. Winners of each go to the final round. Judge Judy and Dr. Oz on the sidelines.
This walkback was a lot faster than the debacle at Duke. Which means that the whole country is used to the lies of the MSM and is virtually certain when all of the top media outlets produce another one of their RGC melodramas that the narrative is completely incongruent with the facts on the ground. I don't read the NYT or follow its beer picnics as I haven't got time to keep up with that sleazy organization whose motto should be, "Any noose that fits."
"I propose Nancy Grace and Al Sharpton; Jesse Jackson goes up against Gloria Allred. Winners of each go to the final round. Judge Judy and Dr. Oz on the sidelines."
I say bring back Battle Bots. Teams of two, let them go at it.
Reporter Matt Gutman said the clearer video shows “what appear to be a pair of gashes or welts on George Zimmerman’s head.”
If Gutman had let his fingers do the walking for him before he made an ass out of himself and furthered the "guilty of racist murder" narrative with the claim there was no injury, he would have found, (as I have mentioned before) a Sanford Police Department report **which had already been posted on the internet** that indicated a police officer observed Zimmerman's back was wet with grass marks and the Sanford Fire Rescue paramedic/EMT treated Zimmerman's bleeding nose and head at the site of the altercation that night.
I make no claim to know what happened in the altercation / death but facts are facts and turning opinion into news, making up sh*t to fill broadcast time -- if it isn't a crime, sure is a sin.
Especially in a case like this.
Also several witnesses were push-polled by the police the night it happened suggesting to interviwed witnesses that the man in the red jacket was being beaten by the skinny kid, right?
Proof?
When their answers were not what the police wanted to hear, those interviews were tossed out as unreliable. Let's hear the audio tapes the police made of those intrviews.
Proof of this?
A witness heard the shot and looked back up from his 911 call to see the heavy set hispanic man getting off the skinny teen's face down body.
Because leaving a bleeding, dead body on top of you makes great sense. What do you think would happen if he rolled dead weight off of him?
But to me it smells like an intentional cover up of a stupid Zimmerman. It also looks like diplomatic immunity in action.
Fortunately it does not look like is racism so much as it looks like a free pass for a well meaning profiler's mistakes.
Why mess up two lives? Right? We can't bring Trayvon back. So it became Cover Up City. And that cover up alone is what is fueling the racial angle.
I suppose it'd be too much to ask for a reason WHY the cops would do that?
You keep saying they covered up for him --- yet never explain why in the world they would do so?
The voice analsis is certain that the screams which were stopped by a gunshot were made by the dead teen and not by the shooter.
The analysis that used a machine to determine it wasn't Zimmerman --- but used the "expert's ear" to determine it WAS Trayvon?
Forgive me if I'm less than convinced.
You got taken by this story and have not been terribly rational about it. You're now tossing out absurd conspiracy theories.
stressing that he cannot confirm the voice as Trayvon's, because he didn't have a sample of the teen's voice to compare.
Doesn;t matter what the perecntage is.
That guy would be eaten alive by the defense on the stand. Totally and completely discredited.
Not to mention I saw elsewhere he started selling his program (untested and unverified by outside sources) on March 1, 2012.
Let's hear the audio tapes the police made of those intrviews.
Yes tradguy and if we did and they didn't contain what you want to hear, you'd claim they were "doctored" as part of the "cover up"
Isn't that nice.
NBC has already been busted doctoring the 911 tape. Why should we believe anything the MSM says?
NBC TapeGate.
notice tradguy has nothing to say about the doctored tape. All that matters are the grief of the criminal's parents. Nothing else matters in his world.
ABC News finally got arouind to admitting what anyone with any sense already knew, which was that their grainy surveillance video was grainy!)
Oh please. Don't be so naive.
A production like that involves around a dozen media staff, up and down the chain of command. It was not an "accident".
You can bet that if ABC needed to show Zimmerman's wounds to fit their narrative, the tape would have been the Enchanced DVD version, along with artifact arrows to help viewers see the wounds.
What ABC did was deliberate. And now we have a Legion of Libtards who will be shouting "No Wounds!" for the next decade, despite the evidence.
I mean c'mon, this is the post-RatherGate era.
That does it, Quail !
))) whap (((
* looks up Pareto *
Oh, that.
This whole thing is showing me how racism goes out in America eventually becoming so splendidly blended. The Hispanic guy with a German last name. Oops. You don't know the the race of anybody so just give up already.
The Asian-looking guy with the southern accent isn't all that unusual so that comic routine loses its edge. I notice a number of the nationality signs have dropped from the lists but I still use those signs, what, are they too graphic or just absurd? Japanese is j flicked at the eye. Incidentally, I don't get the thing for Korea. What does that refer to? When you say North Korea it looks funny because the n goes up slowly and then fast down tap tap, and when I tap my head and cheekbone with my fingertips like that, don't tell anybody this, but, the sound I hear inside is hollow.
I want to mock, keep racism alive it's all you got, but that's not all the race hustlers have. I think the carve-outs eventually go, hey, I've been carved out for special attention and the other political side doesn't seem to care that much about me specifically. Attempts are made to carve me out from three different angles that I see, and I'm not having it but that's me going against the current and I feel the current shifting. I look at it as someone trying to fit in with the norms, as I read you, and this not caring about me specifically helps in that effort, but that is still just me and there is much greater blending beyond myself fitting in, even people who went with the carve out currents, like Hispanic guys with German last names.
damikesc:
I'll tell you why there was a "coverup" orchestrated to benefit Zimmerman. Obama ordered it because he needs the Hispanic votes!
We? Who is we? Your "side"? Democrats? Race-hustlers?
We, the public. You know, the citizens of this nation? As for me, I am interested in is deciding what the truth of the matter is. (Well, that and avoiding race riots, as I'd be in the immediate cross-hairs.)
But I do love that you are slandering me as a race-baiter and Democrat (that last even worse than being called a Republican)for my beliefs that (a) we don't know all the facts yet, (b) those "facts" still have to be interpretted, and (c) perhaps rushing to judgement either way is a bad thing.
And if you had been paying any kind of attention at all you would see that I have pointed out problems with the stories both sides (those that care that Zimmerman is guilty no matter what versus those that care that Zimmerman is innocent no matter what) are telling.
But you have joined the Sharptons of the world in insisting that the truth can only be, MUST only be, what you want it to be, and even asking a question about the matter at hand is seen as evil.
Like I said, this is really bringing out the stupid in people.
Does that mean you're not going to pony up $100,000 for Zimmerman's defense in a show trial?
Or are you just casual with other people's money?
Oh please. Don't be so naive.
A production like that involves around a dozen media staff, up and down the chain of command. It was not an "accident".
Okay, Fen, where did I claim ABC News made an honest mistake? I stated that they admitted what everyone already knew, which was grainy video is grainy video.
I actually did something I swore I'd never do two or three weeks back, and created a Twitter account. I did so solely to tweet Gutman that an earlier story he had done contained three factual errors in the first three paragraphs of his story. Last I checked he had never bothered to make any corrections. So don't act like I'm am some naive type buying the media spin.
I am writing what I mean, and only what I mean. Stating that two experts claim that it isn't Zimmerman's voice calling for help means that I am passing along that two experts claim that it isn't Zimmerman's voice calling for help. In fact, if you were to infere anything it would be that I found their claims at least worthy of some suspiscion.
Similarly with the ABC News video case.
When did the Althouse commentariat get so fucking stupid that they interprete anything that isn't a "ME TOO!" as complete and total disagreement on everything?
Okay, Fen, where did I claim ABC News made an honest mistake? I stated that they admitted what everyone already knew, which was grainy video is grainy video.
You minimized their fraud. You implied it was a "oh gosh we made a silly mistake" error.
And don't pretend you're only here to get to the truth. Your "defense" of Zimmerman has been lesser than your defense of Martin by several degrees. You're not as clever as you think. And your audience isn't as stupid as you believe.
I am passing along that two experts claim that it isn't Zimmerman's voice calling for help. In fact, if you were to infere anything it would be that I found their claims at least worthy of some suspiscion
Bullshit.
1) you left out the fact they claim a 48% match
2) you pretend they didn't go "expert" shopping. They consulted 12 experts and only printed 2. Do you think that's informative.
3) you ignored responses by actual voice rec experts that state you need the subject to supply a scripted audio very similar in verbage and tone to your test materail in order to get an accurate analysis.
If you were actually trying to get at the truth, your arguments defending Zimmerman wouldn't be so feeble. And you wouldn't be censoring information that conflicts with the narrative you want.
And you wouldn't give a rat's ass what I thought about your credibility.
The new meme is that this is all about guns. Biden gave it away the other day. Mexico's problem is US made guns. Sure it is. And Biden's father was a poor coal miner, just like Neal KInnock's father was. Oh it WAS Neal Kinnock's father ! And Biden went to expensive prep school.
He can't avoid lying. Maybe it's the brain damage.
Icepick said...
Wow, the stupid is really out in force on this topic. edutcher, why do you think I mentioned a trial? Might it be so that evidence could be examined, challenged and judged on its merits in a court room?
The "expert" opinion you cited is not evidence, and as presented is utterly inadmissible. These aren't experts. They are publicity seekers and perhaps worse. They can not possibly have applied a methodology that would result in admissible evidence.
Your backtracking while bobbing and weaving is unconvincing. You clearly were making the point that this is a meaningful development. In fact it is nothing.
If Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman it's probably because he thought Zimmerman was some Hispanic gangbanger looking to protect his turf.
I found that article far more fair and even-handed than anything I have seen in the MSM. Most of the coverage has been utterly racist. Just seeing the humanity of George Zimmerman is a huge step up for the NYT.
The case seems like a classic misunderstanding. Zimmerman is suspicious of Martin. "What's this guy doing? Why is walking up to the houses?" And Martin is suspicious of Zimmerman. "Why is this guy following me? Now he's chasing after me!"
I can totally see a young man respond with violence out of fear and aggression.
It seems to me also that this case utterly depends on how serious the injuries to Zimmerman were. To respond with deadly force, you have to be attacked with deadly force.
You're not allowed to shoot somebody because he punched you in the nose. Even if he sits on top of you and beats you, you're not allowed to kill him.
I think it's entirely possible that George Zimmerman used excessive force.
"A witness heard the shot and looked back up from his 911 call to see the heavy set hispanic man getting off the skinny teen's face down body."
Zimmerman was first reported by the media to weigh 220 pounds, which was backed up somewhat by the 7-year old booking photo they published of him. It is now known that he actually weighs only 170 pounds. That completely changes the whole perception, doesn't it?
@Saint Croix
So what should Zimmerman have done? Call a timeout to assess the seriousness of his injuries in order to make a determination of just how much force he could use to defend himself?
Or is it that his injuries are not as severe as they could have been had he not defended himself when he did?
So what should Zimmerman have done?
Have you ever been in a fight? You fight. If you lose, you lose. Cover up. I got two black eyes one time. So what?
Self-defense cases are notoriously hard. You typically don't charge murder in a case like that. But you may very well charge manslaughter.
A broken nose does not equal shooting. Does it?
He shot an unarmed man. That's a problem.
He should have injuries that indicate his life was in danger. Broken nose, some stitches on the back of his head? That does not indicate a life-or-death struggle to me.
My brother and I have gotten into an embarrassing number of fistfights in our lifetimes. Maybe 10?
One time, I made my brother's lip bleed. But he wouldn't stop fighting, so I locked myself in my bedroom.
He destroyed my lunchbox. Just kept beating my lunchbox against our basketball pole.
Then he spit blood on my door.
He totally got blamed for that one. Had to buy me a new lunchbox and clean up my door.
He should have injuries that indicate his life was in danger. Broken nose, some stitches on the back of his head? That does not indicate a life-or-death struggle to me.
Okaaaaay Dr McCoy.
To respond with deadly force, you have to be attacked with deadly force.
Sorry, but thats not correct.
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.
...a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—(1)
A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.01 , ...is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force,...
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html
He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm
Great bodily harm is a broader definition than deadly force. I think it would include rape, for instance. Or say somebody is trying to stab your eye out, or cripple you for life.
What Martin did to Zimmerman was simple assault. I used to prosecute them all the time. You can't use deadly force to protect yourself from simple assault. Not in the common law, not in the statute you cite, not in any case I've ever read or heard about.
Saint Croix, you are a fool.
I know of numerous cases where people died from one punch or one push.
If someone is slamming your head on concrete, that is clearly a threat to your life.
It's too bad you can't sign a contract saying I get one free punch and nothing would happen to me. I'd ask for your address and see how much damage I could do with one punch. You might be surprised...then again, you might not wake up.
Postscript: my CAPTCHA actually says 'nwasons'.
Hilarious.
St Croix: I used to prosecute them all the time.
I don't beleive you.
Because you think having your head repeatedly slammed into the concrete = simple assault. Seriously, call up any ER and ask them what damage is done to those attacked this way.
And because you wrongly claimed (@7:42 PM) that "to respond with deadly force, you have to be attacked with deadly force" when a simple google of the statute would have shown you a "reasonable belief of great bodily harm" also allows you to respond with deadly force.
Even reading between the lines of your recent posts, it looks as if you aren't certain, ie. "I think it's entirely possible that George Zimmerman used excessive force."
You want to backtrack or keep digging that hole?
If someone is slamming your head on concrete, that is clearly a threat to your life.
Yup. If I'm on top of you and have your head in my hands, I can snap your neck with one move.
Its not hard, its a simple move they taught us in Marine boot camp.
St Croix also skips over the "reasonable belief of great bodily harm".
Just fricken google "head trauma from being slammed into concrete"
Here's the first return:
"Osborn recently represented Christopher Harris, a 29-year-old man who endured catastrophic brain trauma after being slammed into a concrete wall"
http://www.osbornmachler.com/news/news_abota.html
Tell us "counselor", does catastrophic brain trauma qualify as "great bodily harm"?
BTW, I shouldn't belittle you and I apologize for that. I usually find you to be a rational commenter worth reading. So try take whatever angst you may have from personal attacks out of this.
And instead, think about your argument - its in tatters.
Revise and extend, yes?
Innocent man was left with catastrophic brain damage
[after having his head slammed into concrete..]
"He was taken to hospital and diagnosed with irreversible brain damage. He is unable to walk, talk or care for himself and needs 24 hours care.
'Christopher Harris has irreversible brain damage, and will never recover,' he said.
'He will never walk or talk with his wife and family, or engage in any activities or experiences of daily life.' "
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1348678/Innocent-man-catastrophic-brain-damage-sheriffs-deputy-tackle.html
Does this meet your definition of "great bodily harm" ??
The defense rests.
St croix in the State fo florida the definition of grievous bodilyharm includes the use of any weapon which can cause1)a wound requiring sutures to close3)any broken bone-which includes sidewalks.Yes an unarmed man canbe convicted of murder for slamming someone's head against the ground.
Sorry idiot operating this keyboard but GBH also includes extended unconsciousness.And if you were charging simple assault for people slamming their heads into the sidewalk you were seriously undercharging.And where did i receive my knowledge of this.In numerous firearms and law enforcement defensive tactics course over the last twenty years.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा