I'm agreeing with you that it's quite possible that Trayvon meant a "buttfucker" when he referred to George as a "creepy ass cracker", especially considering Rachel had speculated to Trayvon that George might be a rapist.

My point is, it was smart of the prosecution not to attempt to define what Trayvon meant with that characterization. The defense was trying to use the "cracker" reference to suggest that Trayvon attacked George based on race.

I don't think anyone on the jury would make that leap, though West did seem to enjoy repeating "creepy ass cracker". I think the jury would more easily believe that Trayvon was the initial physical aggressor if he'd been under belief that George was a chester. So, I think the prosecution was right not to argue the true meaning and move on.

My ass is going out walking, while white.

P.s. Hope you and your grandson had a good time at the Magic Kingdom. My mom said it was hot as hell there yesterday.

Just throwing a couple pics out here for conversation.

What are your thoughts on this. If this is the pic that was used would it have made a difference in peoples opinion of Z & T?




People are now using this pic that just came out to try and "prove" Z did not shoot T because of his race. Thoughts?

(06-28-2013, 10:05 PM)username Wrote: And George could have met the officers (at his truck or the mailboxes) like he originally arranged until he decided to ask the 911 operator to have them call him when they arrived instead. So he could keep following Trayvon. Because he was in fear for his life pursuing Trayvon.

Z could have retreated as easily as T.

Sure. George could have done MANY things differently.

However . . . did he break any laws by following Trayvon?

Is there any evidence contradicting that spic WASN'T in fear of his life and thus allowed (by Florida law) to shoot the nigger?

Isn't the case about whether the elements allowing the use of deadly force (according to the statute) were in play the night the little thug was shot by tubby?

Or is this one based on dead black males and racism?

F.U., I think the one of him displaying his gold teeth and calling himself 'no limit nigga' is more incriminating and polorizing. This trial has done more to show me how wide the gap of misunderstanding there is between races in our country and I want each side to listen to the other more before passing judgement.

(06-30-2013, 07:06 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: Just throwing a couple pics out here for conversation.

What are your thoughts on this. If this is the pic that was used would it have made a difference in peoples opinion of Z & T?

It wouldn't have changed my opinion. I view this one of T as being staged. I think there are probably a million & one pix of that nature on kid's FB pages across the world. I don't know why thugs are emulated by so many young people but they are, they want to be perceived as being tuff.

I'm not naive enough to think that a picture wouldn't make a difference (one way or another) but the facts of the case are all that really matter. The pictures are just hype.

(06-30-2013, 07:15 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(06-30-2013, 07:06 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: Just throwing a couple pics out here for conversation.

What are your thoughts on this. If this is the pic that was used would it have made a difference in peoples opinion of Z & T?

It wouldn't have changed my opinion. I view this one of T as being staged. I think there are probably a million & one pix of that nature on kid's FB pages across the world. I don't know why thugs are emulated by so many young people but they are, they want to be perceived as being tuff.

That picture is not of Trayvon Martin.

(06-30-2013, 07:34 PM)Adub Wrote: That picture is not of Trayvon Martin.

They all look the same to me :(

...most Asians look the same to me too. Same goes with Mexicans.

Adub, I'm glad you're back. I like it when you're actively posting about this case.

(06-30-2013, 07:34 PM)Adub Wrote: That picture is not of Trayvon Martin.

Even if that is true it means little. I am sure that there are enough pics of T that are similar [or worse] than this.

The point of the pic is still the same. Media portrayed T as a innocent little kid and Z as a gun happy racist from day one.

(06-30-2013, 07:43 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote:

(06-30-2013, 07:34 PM)Adub Wrote: That picture is not of Trayvon Martin.

Even if that is true it means little. I am sure that there are enough pics of T that are similar [or worse] than this.

The point of the pic is still the same. Media portrayed T as a innocent little kid and Z as a gun happy racist from day one.

Are you kidding?? Granted, Trayvon may have had pictures that were even more thug-like than that one but you think it's okay to go grab some random, stereotypical image off the interwebs and post it as Trayvon??? I guess I could go find some fat, Hispanic, potentially racist mug shots to compare to the fake Trayvon image as well.

Okey-doke.

(06-30-2013, 07:13 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(06-28-2013, 10:05 PM)username Wrote: And George could have met the officers (at his truck or the mailboxes) like he originally arranged until he decided to ask the 911 operator to have them call him when they arrived instead. So he could keep following Trayvon. Because he was in fear for his life pursuing Trayvon.

Z could have retreated as easily as T.

Sure. George could have done MANY things differently.

However . . . did he break any laws by following Trayvon?

We'll see:

The justifications for use of force will also not apply where the evidence establishes that the defendant initially provoked violence against him- or herself. To claim self-defense in such a scenario, Section 776.041 requires the defendant to demonstrate that he or she used every reasonable means short of deadly force to extricate him- or herself from the situation, and that the degree of force used by the other person (the initial non-aggressor) led the defendant to reasonably believe that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. Alternatively, a defendant who is an initial aggressor may claim self-defense if: (1) in good faith, he or she withdrew from physical contact, (2) clearly indicated to the other person that he or she desired to withdraw and terminate the use of force, and (3) despite the communication and withdrawal, the other person continued or resumed the use of force. See Section 776.041(2)(b), Florida Statutes.     

(06-30-2013, 07:43 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote:

(06-30-2013, 07:34 PM)Adub Wrote: That picture is not of Trayvon Martin.

Even if that is true it means little. I am sure that there are enough pics of T that are similar [or worse] than this.

The point of the pic is still the same. Media portrayed T as a innocent little kid and Z as a gun happy racist from day one.

The pic on the right is a more accurate depiction of Trayvon at the time of the incident. The one on the left was the one published in order to garner sympathy for him.

The point is still the same user. Laugh all ya want it means nothing.
For this conversation they could be pics of monkeys, it makes little difference. The point is that the media used pics that suported their opinion [or should I say to gain ratings]. They cared nothing about the truth, they convicted Z as soon as the story broke.

(06-30-2013, 08:15 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: they convicted Z as soon as the story broke.

Maybe because some people saw a young person doing nothing more than taking a shortcut home on a dark, rainy night armed with nothing more than candy and a fruit drink.

(06-30-2013, 08:33 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(06-30-2013, 08:15 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: they convicted Z as soon as the story broke.

Maybe because some people saw a young person doing nothing more than taking a shortcut home on a dark, rainy night armed with nothing more than candy and a fruit drink.

While that may be true Duch, they are still the media. Their job is to report the news, not put their own spin on it.

(06-30-2013, 08:15 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: The point is still the same user. Laugh all ya want it means nothing.
For this conversation they could be pics of monkeys, it makes little difference. The point is that the media used pics that suported their opinion [or should I say to gain ratings]. They cared nothing about the truth, they convicted Z as soon as the story broke.

Your use of the word monkeys is interesting. So if there were some fake pic out there of George, you'd be okay with that getting circulated in the media? Because they're all the same?

That pic was never circulated in the media. That was just something someone put together to make a point.

(06-30-2013, 08:47 PM)F.U. Dont ask again Wrote: That pic was never circulated in the media. That was just something someone put together to make a point.

And what do you think was the point? That people should assume that a black kid Trayvon's age was a thug?

The point was that the pics they actually used portrayed T as a innocent little kid. They should have used a more recent pic than they did. They also could have used a different pic of Z. Something like the one used in the pic I posted. The used pics that made Z look like a criminal, standing there in his jail house oranges and used a pic of T that screamed I am a innocent little jock.
Do you think it was by accident that they used the pics that they did?