When Rachel Jeantel says 'cracker,' it's a cultural thing...

[Von Halen]

I don't know shit about this case, or give a shit about it, because I've got enough of my own problems. But, from what I have heard about it, I have gathered this much.

This 6 ft almost 200 lb "kid" was a thug who had already been well versed in his sense of entitlement.

The accused was a wanna be cop that probably shouldn't have put himself in that situation, but when did, acted in self defense or he'd probably be the dead one. Nobody would have given it a second thought.

OJ got away with double murder.
Zimmerman got away with killing this kid in self defense. I'm not saying that, the jury did.

Which of the following statements is the most accurate?

Blacks - Most of them live in ghetto areas.
Whites - Most of them live in trailer parks.
Mexicans - Most of them live in one bedroom apartments with at least 25 other mexicans.
Asians - Most of them can't drive.

Sorry if I neglected to offend anyone.

[FORD]

Ford, you're a fucking moron and hypocrite. How about get off your soapbox and take a stand for all the people in this country that get killed in this country each and every day. Shit, i can't remember in recent memory the last time a white guy killed a black man, but I could show daily killings in every state that goes unnoticed by the media of black on black and black on white that never even gets a second look or even solved. You're nothing more than a blind sheep, that follows people like Sharpton and Jackson. You stand and protest for only the side you think is right and don't give a damn about the whole picture but just a tiny sliver of all the bullshit that happens each day. Well, the Martin family got Zimmerman to be arrested, and got him charged with 2nd degree murder. After all the evidence was laid out, especially the proof that Travon was the aggressor and Zimmerman had no choice but to defend himself, he got judged by a jury of his peers to be found not guilty. Was this something that could have been avoided, maybe so. For whatever reason though, in that moment in time, conflict wasn't avoided and cooler heads didn't prevail. One person became aggressive and it cost him his life.

Fuck off you racist twat.

Zimmerklansman was the agressor.

He was trolling the neighborhood with his gun, looking for trouble.

Black kid in a hooded sweatshirt? Oh he MUST be a criminal, because you know, those "fucking coons" always are. And they always get away with it too.

Well not this time goddamn it, because I, George Fucking Zimmerman, defender of the White Race and the Confederate States of Goddamned America will defend a gated neighborhood that MY FAT FUCKING ASS DOESN'T EVEN LIVE IN from a kid, who in fact, DID have a valid reason to be there. Except it doesn't count, because he's a "fucking coon".

So I'll stalk him for a while.... and if he moves, I'll kill him. Why the fuck not? My daddy the judge is friends with the BCE, so I'll never do time for it.

This is the piece of shit you're defending?

You should be ashamed of yourself. And Zimmerklansman should be on death row.

[Fairwrning]

"Fucking coons" isn't an indication of skin color?

I have listened to this tape several times..no way can you get coons out of it..he clearly says punks..and assholes..black guy,after being asked by the 911 operator..

[Dr. Love]

Fuck off you racist twat.

Zimmerklansman was the agressor.

He was trolling the neighborhood with his gun, looking for trouble.

Black kid in a hooded sweatshirt? Oh he MUST be a criminal, because you know, those "fucking coons" always are. And they always get away with it too.

Well not this time goddamn it, because I, George Fucking Zimmerman, defender of the White Race and the Confederate States of Goddamned America will defend a gated neighborhood that MY FAT FUCKING ASS DOESN'T EVEN LIVE IN from a kid, who in fact, DID have a valid reason to be there. Except it doesn't count, because he's a "fucking coon".

So I'll stalk him for a while.... and if he moves, I'll kill him. Why the fuck not? My daddy the judge is friends with the BCE, so I'll never do time for it.

This is the piece of shit you're defending?

You should be ashamed of yourself. And Zimmerklansman should be on death row.

So you don't think maybe he thought TM was suspicious because, as he said in the audio, he was walking from house to house staring into the houses?

I don't care what color someone is, if there's a person doing that in my neighborhood, I'm calling the cops and keeping my eyes on the guy until he arrives. I would want the cops to deal with him, not be unable to find him and then have the risk that the guy is going to be staring into my house, or breaking in.

You don't seem to have much ability to look at it with an open mind...

[FORD]

I have listened to this tape several times..no way can you get coons out of it..he clearly says punks..and assholes..black guy,after being asked by the 911 operator..

Here's a cleaner version of the 911 call than the one most often heard (and posted previously). The back ground noise has been minimized and the voices of Zimmerman and the dispatcher are both very clear. And what he clearly says at 2:20 is "Fucking COONS".

[Dr. Love]

I guess if it were me on a jury, People would have to convince me that another person was guilty, and prove it to the point that I could be as certain as they were. Some of these posts sound like guilt is a foregone conclusion and they can't conceive of a line of thought that ends with it any other way than GZ being a murderer. It's like the only points that seems to matter are GZ called the cops on someone, made a racial slur, and killed someone. Everything else is irrelevant.

That's unfortunate.

[Dr. Love]

Here's a cleaner version of the 911 call than the one most often heard (and posted previously). The back ground noise has been minimized and the voices of Zimmerman and the dispatcher are both very clear. And what he clearly says at 2:20 is "Fucking COONS".

Those 2 pictures are rather dishonest. Trayvon didn't look like that and he wasn't as young as depicted in that picture.

[Fairwrning]

Not buying the " Cleaned " version..a whispered snippet on a " clean " version..listen to the original with headphones as many times as you like.

[jhale667]

Those 2 pictures are rather dishonest. Trayvon didn't look like that and he wasn't as young as depicted in that picture.

Zimmerman's about a hundred pounds light...

[Fairwrning]

Zimmerman's about a hundred pounds light...

No shit..how the hell do you get so fat when you are stressed..

[FORD]

So you don't think maybe he thought TM was suspicious because, as he said in the audio, he was walking from house to house staring into the houses?

I don't care what color someone is, if there's a person doing that in my neighborhood, I'm calling the cops and keeping my eyes on the guy until he arrives. I would want the cops to deal with him, not be unable to find him and then have the risk that the guy is going to be staring into my house, or breaking in.

You don't seem to have much ability to look at it with an open mind...

Doc, I live on a main street (it literally used to be called that back in the early 20th century). There are strange people walking through my neighborhood literally 24/7. Most of them don't concern me. Last week there was a guy who was having a rather loud argument with himself (or some other non visible entity) while walking by, and I thought about calling the men in the white coats and telling them to bring a straight jacket briefly, but he didn't appear to be too much of a danger to himself or others, so I let it go.

In the 14 years that I've lived here, I think I've seen police cars maybe 4 or 5 times for something other than speed traps (they really love this neighborhood for that purpose). There was a methlab across the street briefly that was soon evicted, and there was one murder a few years ago a couple blocks down, probably also drug related, from what I recall.

So I'm not completely immune from crime here, but so far, it's a very low percentage. I'm fine with that. And I don't need to stalk anybody around my neighborhood to ensure it.

[jhale667]

Fuck off you racist twat.

Zimmerklansman was the agressor.

He was trolling the neighborhood with his gun, looking for trouble.

Black kid in a hooded sweatshirt? Oh he MUST be a criminal, because you know, those "fucking coons" always are. And they always get away with it too.

Well not this time goddamn it, because I, George Fucking Zimmerman, defender of the White Race and the Confederate States of Goddamned America will defend a gated neighborhood that MY FAT FUCKING ASS DOESN'T EVEN LIVE IN from a kid, who in fact, DID have a valid reason to be there. Except it doesn't count, because he's a "fucking coon".

So I'll stalk him for a while.... and if he moves, I'll kill him. Why the fuck not? My daddy the judge is friends with the BCE, so I'll never do time for it.

This is the piece of shit you're defending?

You should be ashamed of yourself. And Zimmerklansman should be on death row.

Of course he's defending him... and of course HE can't remember "can't remember in recent memory the last time a white guy killed a black man" but the fact is it happens way more than residents of the state of denial realize, or want to admit.



It IS About Race: Study Finds Significant Racial Bias In ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws
Author: Lorraine Devon Wilke July 14, 2013 10:55 am

After the stunning verdict in the George Zimmerman trial was announced, social media, as expected, exploded. Outrage was mixed with heated rationale for the verdict and, frankly, it got ugly. Threads practically screamed with vile comments, race baiting, insults, and fierce debates about whether or not this trial was, A. fair, B. an indictment of the “Stand Your Ground” (SYG) law, or C. a statement about race in America.

For those who went with choice “A”… what can I say? Go celebrate, raise a glass to the technicalities of law and fumbles of the prosecution. Those voting for choice “B”… YES, no doubt. SYG is a codified excuse for vigilante justice, often of the racist kind, and very arbitrary in its pendulum swings of interpretation. As for choice “C”… race. The great American debate. Not only have the Obama years made it clear, but reactions to this trial have underscored it: we are NOT a post-racial society. In accordance with this reality, there’s a strong suspicion that “Stand Your Ground” and racial bias have a link. Do they?

First of all, let’s get a bit of background: the law was originally called the “castle doctrine” and held that a person had the right to defend their “castle”; meaning, they didn’t have to retreat but could, in fact, use deadly force against an intruder in their home. During the 1980s, several states adapted the law, changing the name to “Make My Day” (Dirty Harry, anyone?) and in 2005, Florida took the law even further with “Stand Your Ground”:

Florida’s law states “a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felon.

Laws in at least 21 states allow that there is no duty to retreat an attacker in any place in which one is lawfully present. (Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.) At least nine of those states include language stating one may “stand his or her ground.” (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.) [Source: National Conference of State Legislatures]

That’s the foundation of the law; clearly interpretation can be found in between the lines and often is. The question is, has the law helped make people safer? Kept their homes safer? Kept them alive in situations in which they felt threatened? And has there been or is there a racial component in how the law is implemented, as many believe is the case with Trayvon Martin’s death and the acquittal of the man who killed him?

A Frontline piece titled Is There Racial Bias in “Stand Your Ground” Laws? discussed a study done last year by PBS Frontline on those very questions, focused particularly on how murder convictions and the racial make-up of victims have been impacted by the SYG. What they found was, to put it bluntly, that “Stand Your Ground” makes it easier for blacks to be murdered without anyone being convicted of the crime. From Frontline:

Since Martin’s killer, George Zimmerman, invoked the stand-your-ground defense, these laws have been defended by gun rights groups for empowering civilians. They’ve also been criticized by civil rights groups for encouraging violence and being racially biased.

A recent study suggests that laws may lead to more deaths. According to a June study [pdf] by researchers at Texas A&M University, the rates of murder and non-negligent manslaughter increased by 8 percent in states with Stand Your Ground laws. That’s an additional 600 homicides per year in the states that have enacted such laws.

The study, which analyzed FBI crime data nationwide from 2000-2009, says it could mean either that more people are using lethal force in self-defense, or that situations are more likely to escalate to the use of violence in states with the laws. “Regardless, the study said, “the results indicate that a primary consequence of strengthening self-defense law is increased homicide.”

Sound like a recent case on trial? And given the clear backlash to the law since Martin’s murder and, certainly, since the verdict came in, isn’t it time to discuss the fact that the law contributes to an increase in murder and manslaughter as opposed to a decrease? That cannot be the intent of anyone involved with SYG and yet… the law persists on the books of 28 states. And, let’s be clear, the racial component is something to note:

[John] Roman [senior fellow at the Urban Institute's Justice Policy Center] also found that Stand Your Ground laws tend to track the existing racial disparities in homicide convictions across the U.S. — with one significant exception: Whites who kill blacks in Stand Your Ground states are far more likely to be found justified in their killings.In non-Stand Your Ground states, whites are 250 percent more likely to be found justified in killing a black person than a white person who kills another white person; in Stand Your Ground states, that number jumps to 354 percent



Roman’s analysis of the FBI crime data breaks it down even further:

If there are types of homicide where shootings are often justified, SYG laws are reasonable. However, if there are few circumstances where shootings are justified, those laws will impede justice.

We turned to the Supplemental Homicide Report (SHR) maintained by the FBI, which includes all reported homicides in the US, including justifiable homicides, to determine what types of cases—and how often—civilian use of deadly force was justified.

We combed the data to identify homicides which resemble the known facts from the Trayvon Martin case—cases in which there was a single victim and a single shooter (both of whom were civilians and strangers) and in which the victim was killed by a handgun. We identified 4,650 of these cases in the SHR. Of these, just 10.9 percent (506) were ruled to be justifiable homicides.

However, we note that these numbers vary by whether a state is a SYG state. In SYG states, 13.6% of homicides under these circumstances are found to be justified. In non-SYG states, only 7.2 percent are justified.

We then looked for a scenario where homicides are justified more than half the time. It turns out that the scenario with the highest probability of being a justified homicide is much like the Martin case—a single, White civilian handgun shooter who is a stranger to (and older than) the Black victim. But even then, the shooting is found to be justified less than half the time.

As I’m writing this, I’m reflecting on the number of very heated voices, post-verdict, that stated without a shred of equivocation that there was, and is, nothing racial about the Martin case, even going so far as to state that if Trayvon Martin had not been black the case wouldn’t even have gone to trial (reverse racism is always handy to throw around in these circumstances). This meme has been propagated by Zimmerman’s brother and others involved with the case, as well as countless commenters who apparently cannot face the fact of our not-post-racial country. Even on the night of the verdict, some were calling Martin a ‘thug’ and asserting that he was the aggressor, despite facts that clearly show Zimmerman stalked the boy without cause or provocation and “escalated to the use of violence” as stated in the Frontline piece. The Martin/Zimmerman case was, in fact, a true exemplification of the law’s weaknesses.

But let’s look specifically at the very notorious state of Florida. Known for its sharply conservative climate and its controversial decisions about a great many things, from religion, porn, pot, politics, and, of course, race, the issue of SYG has taken center stage since the Martin killing. Roman extrapolates:

Finally, we searched the SHR data for cases that matched all the facts of the Martin case (including ages and races). Out of 70,000 cases, we find that the homicides similar to the Martin case occurred just 23 times in five years. Of those 23 cases, only 9 (39 percent) were ruled to be justifiable homicides. Since the overwhelming majority of shootings are not justified, it seems clear that SYG laws reduce the chance for justice by moving the burden of proof from the shooter to law enforcement.

In the Martin case, since Florida is a SYG state, the law strongly favors Zimmerman. It appears as though local law enforcement [with SYG] will not find probable cause that Zimmerman’s shooting was unjustified. By contrast, without the SYG law, it seems reasonable to predict that Zimmerman would not be able to demonstrate to a jury that the shooting was justified. Thus, history suggests Florida’s Stand Your Ground law will lead to a miscarriage of justice.

As it did for Trayvon Martin. John Roman wrote that piece over a year ago; little did he know how prescient his words would be. Or, then again, maybe he did.

Time to stand up and take down “Stand Your Ground.”

[jhale667]

No shit..how the hell do you get so fat when you are stressed..

I don't think he ever thought he was going to get convicted. His (and his family's) smug demeanor throughout didn't suggest it. Seems like he's been living it up in protected custody.


Wonder if he'll have the same publisher as the Juror that went on Anderson Cooper...

[Fairwrning]

I don't think he ever thought he was going to get convicted. His (and his family's) smug demeanor throughout didn't suggest it. Seems like he's been living it up in protected custody.


Wonder if he'll have the same publisher as the Juror that went on Anderson Cooper...

That I agree with..I guarantee you he didnt think he was going to be found guilty.

Last word on this..another case coming soon in Florida..Middle-aged White guy shot car full of Black teens because the music was too loud apparently..I would like to note for the record I think the white dude is guilty as hell already..unless they prove one of em punched him in the face...
I think the STG laws are bullshit..you can say almost anything and try to use that crap..witness testimony and actual proof are the only rules that a juror should follow.

[Von Halen]

I don't know what kind of a neighborhood you live in FORD, but if a black dude is in my neighborhood looking in peoples windows, he's gonna be in deep shit. In fact, if a white dude is walking around looking in peoples windows, he's gonna be in deep shit. A guy walking on the sidewalk talking to himself, is no comparison to someone casing houses.