Mock - walking while black

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185

some of his best friends were black.
he just didn't like mexicans. Sarcastic

(05-02-2012, 05:59 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]some of his best friends were black.
he just didn't like mexicans.

But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

(05-02-2012, 06:06 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

Again, repeating myself, your theory is that he is a discriminating racist.

We know that he's a racist.

We know that he shot and killed an unarmed black kid who had every right to be where he was.

What aren't you getting?

He killed a black kid that looked like other black kids that had been suspected of crimes in the hood.

Trayvon was racially profiled as a criminal. His size made him look kind of scrappy.

Zimmerman only likes smiling, fat black guys.

And scantily clad fat-assed black women.

Black kids going through the awkward stages of adolescence are suspicious and up to no good.

Too bad Trayvon didn't have a tire iron handy.

(05-02-2012, 06:08 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:06 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

Again, repeating myself, your theory is that he is a discriminating racist.

We know that he's a racist.

We know that he shot and killed an unarmed black kid who had every right to be where he was.

What aren't you getting?

"Discriminating racist" is an oxymoron. If you're a racist you dislike people of that race. Period. I guess you could say he only disliked black youths but then that would mean he was an ageist, right? Not a racist.

He may have profiled but that doesn't mean he was racist. It might just have been based on the history in that neighborhood.

I'm not defending his actions (at all) because I think he stalked the kid and basically provoked the confrontation (from what I know so far) but I'm not willing to pin this as a racist attack.

I think Desciple is black.

(05-03-2012, 12:17 AM)username Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:08 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:06 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

The phrase was INTENDED to be a play on words.

Again, repeating myself, your theory is that he is a discriminating racist.

We know that he's a racist.

We know that he shot and killed an unarmed black kid who had every right to be where he was.

What aren't you getting?

"Discriminating racist" is an oxymoron. If you're a racist you dislike people of that race. Period. I guess you could say he only disliked black youths but then that would mean he was an ageist, right? Not a racist.

He may have profiled but that doesn't mean he was racist. It might just have been based on the history in that neighborhood.

I'm not defending his actions (at all) because I think he stalked the kid and basically provoked the confrontation (from what I know so far) but I'm not willing to pin this as a racist attack.

(05-03-2012, 09:21 AM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]I think Desciple is black.

What if I was?

BTW: WRONG!!!

(05-02-2012, 06:08 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:06 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

We know that he shot and killed an unarmed black kid who had every right to be where he was.

What aren't you getting?

YOU STATE "we know" Martin had every right to be in the neighborhood. What are the FACTS that indicate this? All I have heard is his father was "staying" with a girlfriend. NOT LIVING. If I am wrong, what are the facts of him staying in this house?

Also I am still on the fence about the allegations of the prior robberies. Did Martin know this other black kid who was involved in the robberies? They were the same age!

And I do think that is Zimmerman's posts/comments are being brought to the courts attention, then Martins can be brought in as well. Careful what you wish for...because there might be things the parents were not aware he was doing.

I am not saying what Zimmerman did was right by all means, I just think that the claims of him being racist, etc. are unproven and away from the facts of the HOMICIDE.

****The terms murder and homicide are frequently interchanged; however, there is a difference between the two. Homicide is the killing of one person by another. Murder is a form of criminal homicide, where the perpetrator intended to kill the other person, sometimes with premeditation (a plan to kill). Manslaughter is another type of criminal homicide.****

(05-03-2012, 12:17 AM)username Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:08 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:06 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

Again, repeating myself, your theory is that he is a discriminating racist.

We know that he's a racist.

We know that he shot and killed an unarmed black kid who had every right to be where he was.

What aren't you getting?

"Discriminating racist" is an oxymoron. If you're a racist you dislike people of that race. Period. I guess you could say he only disliked black youths but then that would mean he was an ageist, right? Not a racist.

He may have profiled but that doesn't mean he was racist. It might just have been based on the history in that neighborhood.

I'm not defending his actions (at all) because I think he stalked the kid and basically provoked the confrontation (from what I know so far) but I'm not willing to pin this as a racist attack.

Sorry, my first response didn't come out right. Let's try again.

It was INTENDED as a play on words.

(05-03-2012, 11:37 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:08 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-02-2012, 06:06 PM)Lady Cop Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple:
But, dear LC, he MURDERED a black kid.

well as you know, that will be determined by due process. right now it's homicide, not murder.

my point was you characterize him as a bigot based on a 2005 myspace, when in fact he had black friends.

We know that he shot and killed an unarmed black kid who had every right to be where he was.

What aren't you getting?

YOU STATE "we know" Martin had every right to be in the neighborhood. What are the FACTS that indicate this? All I have heard is his father was "staying" with a girlfriend. NOT LIVING. If I am wrong, what are the facts of him staying in this house?

Also I am still on the fence about the allegations of the prior robberies. Did Martin know this other black kid who was involved in the robberies? They were the same age!

And I do think that is Zimmerman's posts/comments are being brought to the courts attention, then Martins can be brought in as well. Careful what you wish for...because there might be things the parents were not aware he was doing.

I am not saying what Zimmerman did was right by all means, I just think that the claims of him being racist, etc. are unproven and away from the facts of the HOMICIDE.

****The terms murder and homicide are frequently interchanged; however, there is a difference between the two. Homicide is the killing of one person by another. Murder is a form of criminal homicide, where the perpetrator intended to kill the other person, sometimes with premeditation (a plan to kill). Manslaughter is another type of criminal homicide.****

We know that he had the right to be there BECAUSE he was staying with his father's girlfriend. THIS IS AMERICA! Is your argument that he needed someone's permission (say, from someone in the neighborhood, or perhaps even Mr. Zimmerman) to walk to where he was going to spend the night?

I am WELL aware of the difference between homicide and and murder. ROFLMFAO!!!! By my statement, I am expressing an opinion and specifically accusing him of murder.

(05-03-2012, 11:26 AM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 09:21 AM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]I think Desciple is black.

What if I was?

BTW: WRONG!!!

You are, I can tell.

(05-03-2012, 02:40 PM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 11:26 AM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 09:21 AM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]I think Desciple is black.

What if I was?

BTW: WRONG!!!

You are, I can tell.

actually, i have his photo and he's not black. not that it matters.
i can say that since he already said it.

(05-03-2012, 02:40 PM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 11:26 AM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 09:21 AM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]I think Desciple is black.

What if I was?

BTW: WRONG!!!

You are, I can tell.

I shall be a little less polite than LC.

You obviously have your head up your ass.

I can tell. Asshat

(05-03-2012, 03:33 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 02:40 PM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 11:26 AM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 09:21 AM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]I think Desciple is black.

What if I was?

BTW: WRONG!!!

You are, I can tell.

I shall be a little less polite than LC.

You obviously have your head up your ass.

I can tell.

Disciple, so far, to my knowlegde, you and Adub are the only ones at Mock who are 100% sure that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.

From what you've read, what leads you to believe this? Can you give point by point specifics?

I consider myself pretty open-minded and there's NO WAY I can come to that conclusion at this point of the investigation.

Please enlighten the rest of us.

(05-03-2012, 04:02 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 03:33 PM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 02:40 PM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 11:26 AM)Disciple Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-03-2012, 09:21 AM)krystalshores Wrote: [ -> ]I think Desciple is black.

What if I was?

BTW: WRONG!!!

You are, I can tell.

I shall be a little less polite than LC.

You obviously have your head up your ass.

I can tell.

Disciple, so far, to my knowlegde, you and Adub are the only ones at Mock who are 100% sure that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.

From what you've read, what leads you to believe this? Can you give point by point specifics?

I consider myself pretty open-minded and there's NO WAY I can come to that conclusion at this point of the investigation.

Please enlighten the rest of us.

Midwest, a fair question.

I'm assuming that by now everyone is familiar with the basic facts as reported by various sources on the internet.

So I will not do a complete marshalling of the facts.

In Florida, the Murder 2 statute under which Zimmerman is charged is as follows:

(All citations taken from the website of Attorney Richard Hornsby)

Murder with a Depraved Mind

Murder with a Depraved Mind occurs when a person is killed, without any premeditated design, by an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind showing no regard for human life.

I won't recite the facts here, but let's just say we consider the totality of the circumstances:
- unarmed kid, minding his own business, walking where he had every right to be.
- insert prosecution portrayal of Zimmerman: cop wanna be, acting contrary to the training provided by neighborhood Watch, history of racism, violence (including assault against police charges and domestic violence), including excessive zeal while on Neighborhood Watch in the past, the warning from the police not to follow the boy,
etc.

Let's assume that the lead investigator testifies about why he was unconvinced by Zimmerman's story.

Expect Martin's girlfriend to testify about what she heard over the phone when Zimmerman initially confronted Martin.

I recommend looking at "Shooting of Trayvon Martin" on Wikipedia - very informative.

Note also that the prosecutor has a history of trying and winning "Stand Your Ground" cases.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the prosecution presents a prima facie (legally sufficient for a conviction if the jury believes all of the prosecution's case) and it survives a defense motion to dismiss.

The defense, as a practical matter, HAS to put Zimmerman on the stand.

He would have the burden of proving that the homicide is:

excusable:

Excusable Homicide

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
•When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
•When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
•When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner

justifiable:

Justifiable Homicide

The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if done while resisting an attempt by someone to kill you or to commit a felony against you

or self defense:

Self Defense in Florida

In Florida, Self Defense is referred to as the justifiable use of force. In simple terms, the defense allows a person to use force, sometimes deadly force, to protect one's self, one's property, or another person, so long as the force used is proportionate to the threat faced.

Florida's Stand Your Ground Law

Traditionally, if a person was anywhere but their home, the Self Defense law required a person to attempt to first retreat before engaging an aggressor. And to further complicate matters, the defense could only be raised at trial. But in October of 2005, Florida passed the Stand Your Ground Law, which dramatically changed the legal landscape of self defense law.

Under the Stand Your Ground Law, a person who is attacked has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand their ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if it is reasonably believed necessary to to prevent death or great bodily harm or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Also, the Stand Your Ground Law now allows a person to raise the issue of Self Defense both at a Pretrial Hearing and at trial. As a result, if a judge finds that your actions were justified, the Judge is required to dismiss the charges and no trial is required. If the judge does not find your actions were justified, the defense can still be presented to a jury and they can make their own independent determination of whether your actions were justified.

Justifiable Use of Deadly Force

A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
•It is reasonably believed that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony (i.e. Robbery).
•It is being used against a person who is unlawfully and forcefully breaking in, or has unlawfully and forcibly broken into a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle.

Exception to the Use of Deadly Force

Deadly Force cannot be used against:
•A lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder (Unless there is a restraining order in place).
•A parent who is retrieving a child or grandchild for whom they have lawful custody (Meaning you can't shoot an ex-spouse who is picking up children for the weekend and then claim they broke in.)
•The person who uses defensive force is engaged in unlawful activity or using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity.
•A known law enforcement officer who is engaged in a legal duty

What is not clear on Hornsby's site is whether these are defenses (which the prosecution has the burden of disproving) or affirmative defenses (where Zimmerman would have the burden of proof).

Either way, suffice it to say that I expect Zimmerman will self destruct under a competent (which I think we can assume, given the history of the prosecutor) cross examination.

Some examples:

Zimmerman claimed that while he was in his SUV talking to the police, Martin circled his vehicle, frightening Zimmerman. Problem is, he didn't mention this to the dispatcher with whom he was speking at the time.

Good luck trying to explain the racial slurs on his MY Space page.

His racial profiling on the 911 tape.

I wish that I had the time to go into more detail, but I have an early morning. You get the general idea.

Disciple, you keep saying Martin had a right to be where he was. I recall the news media saying something about his father's girlfriend living there, but I don't belive this was ever verified. Maybe you could provide a
link or a source to verify this information. I am not taking sides here; at first, i thought it was cold-blooded
murder, but the more information that was provided, the more I had reasonable doubt. I realize I am not
as smart as you are, but think that the word "murder" can be a verb or a noun, whereas the word "homicide"
can only be a noun. Thus, you believe Zimmerman murdered Martin and is, therefore, guilty of this homicide.
I do hope you had a restful night of sleep. I will wait for the trial to hear circumstances of what happened that
evening before making up my mind about degree of guilt. Also I think telling someone that they have their head
up their ass is rather unfriendly.

(05-04-2012, 12:19 AM)blueberryhill Wrote: [ -> ]Disciple, you keep saying Martin had a right to be where he was. I recall the news media saying something about his father's girlfriend living there, but I don't belive this was ever verified. Maybe you could provide a
link or a source to verify this information. I am not taking sides here; at first, i thought it was cold-blooded
murder, but the more information that was provided, the more I had reasonable doubt. I realize I am not
as smart as you are, but think that the word "murder" can be a verb or a noun, whereas the word "homicide"
can only be a noun. Thus, you believe Zimmerman murdered Martin and is, therefore, guilty of this homicide.
I do hope you had a restful night of sleep. I will wait for the trial to hear circumstances of what happened that
evening before making up my mind about degree of guilt. Also I think telling someone that they have their head
up their ass is rather unfriendly.

Check out Wikipedia for a source.

Murder is a subset of the larger topic of homicide. All murders are homicides, but not all homicides are murders.

Why would you assume that you are not as smart as I am? I certainly wouldn't. I might (or might not) be better educated, but that has nothing to do with intelligence.

The comment WAS rather unfriendly. And this is not how I normally treat people who express an opinion. Everyone has the right to do so. But more than once I DID say that I wasn't black (as if it matters - this is an issue of morality, not to be cheapened by taking sides based upon race). And LC DID vouch for me.

Obviously some part of that was too complicated for her to understand.

In fact, I am almost pure Irish (and not the black Irish, either).

Yes, we'll just have to wait for the trial to see.

I have not read this thread and it's too long (too many forums, so little time!) but I have to say that I HATE this case. My take was like most people - the kid had the right to walk down any public street, as we all do. Zimmerman is a wanna be security guard. I don't know if Trayvon got fed up and jumped Zimmerman but, if he did, who could blame him? Zimmerman was stalking him. Trayvon (from the little I know about this) is the one who stood his ground and got killed in the process.

The reason I hate this case is because of the politicizing. It was so fucking predictable that the special interest, anti right to bear arms assholes would try to use this to further their disarm America agenda. They ALWAYS do this. They want to deprive people, who have done nothing wrong, of their basic human right to self defense. One of the first things out of Al Sharpton's mouth was about getting rid of the stand your ground law. On that reason alone, were I on a jury - no matter if the facts pointed to Zimmerman's guilt - I would be reluctant to convict. They wanna play like that and fuck with the rights of everyone because of the act of one idiot, fuck 'em. I know that it isn't right but the stakes are too high. Sad, I know, but there it is. This is WAY bigger than Trayvon and Zimmerman.