S
seekerz
Guest
On a completely different level, it would tickle my funny bone to have it explained to me why several posters (you are by no means the first) assume me to be male; that despite my numerous references to motherhood!
- Status
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
With a hoodie on, and the rain, it could make it difficult to ascertain his race intitally.
I do get your point though; it sounds different than it reads and there are obviously differences in perception. In my perception, this was racial profiling.
Given my above comment about the hoodie, rain and Zimmermans initial comment that he wasn’t positive about race, I don’t think it was racial profiling.
J
jen_fla
Guest
exactly!Why are we even talking about the hood still?George Zimmerman never said anything about it being suspicious.
he was just giving a description.
S
scipio337
Guest
This is the way I took it. Interesting that race isn’t mentioned until the 911 dispatcher asks for a description, and even then, Zimmerman isn’t 100% sure.
Would it be possible for Zimmerman to “racially profile”, if he didn’t know the race?
S
seekerz
Guest
Fair enough. I’m not even sure how we got back on to the hoodie track. Of course, that takes us back to why Trayvon was suspicious to Zimmerman.exactly!
We don’t have all the information unearthed in the investigation, but we have:
- A very early defense by one of Zimmerman’s Neighborhood Watch partners, who clearly attributes the suspicions to a recent rash of thefts the “majority” of which were perpetrated, according to him, by ‘young black males’. I posted on this defense very early in the first thread on this topic. The man makes absolutely no attempt to step away from the racial profiling obvious in his account of things.
- On a more recent program (6:58 on the video), 2 days ago, someone (not sure if it’s the same person as in #1) again gave that ‘rash of robberies by young black males’ defense, except this time, they were reported to have all been by ‘young black males’. I have seen no attempt to either confirm or disprove the rash of 8 burglaries, or whether anyone had been apprehended and whether one or multiple ‘young black males’ were involved.
- The impressive defense of Zimmerman by Joe Oliver, also referred to the rash of burglaries.
a. the rash of burglaries was seen by those involved (Zimmerman and his defenders) as ample justification for being suspicious of this young black male
or,
b. Zimmerman declined to offer any basis for his suspicions, which of course is his prerogative. But it begs the question, if you’re sending people out to speak for you and you had a justification for being suspicious of the kid, why not present it?
Anyone ever seen the old movie, Cornbread, Earl and Me? The ‘investigation’ was even worse than the ID error.
I will freely admit that I could not possibly qualify to sit on Zimmerman’s jury, assuming that is, he ever gets in front of one.
J
jen_fla
Guest
you are correct. my bad. you were making a point that he was racially profiling and to that i respectfully disagree for the same reasons. stating someone’s race for description is not profiling. we discussed this in the last thread. you and i both agree that to suspect someone of something solely for their race is wrong and is profiling. i also think it is racist. but if someone is on the look out hoping to catch a criminal and has been given information that the suspect is x, and someone sees a person who is of x race who is also engaged in suspicious behavior it is not racial profiling.
you might even agree with that. no? i think where we disagree is that you don’t think trayvon was engaged in anything suspicious.
i have seen many men walking down the sidewalk across the street, stop, turn and stare at me. i wouldn’t be able to make out their eyes or know for sure if they stopped to look at a sign over my head, but i would first assume that they stopped and were staring at me if no one else was around. at night, i might not be able to tell if they were black, hispanic, indian, or a caucasian with dark hair and a really dark tan.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
I know it won’t be me as I was in the jury pool at this courthouse last week when the protests were going on.
J
jen_fla
Guest
whoops. duly noted! sorry 'bout that.On a completely different level, it would tickle my funny bone to have it explained to me why several posters (you are by no means the first) assume me to be male; that despite my numerous references to motherhood!
S
scipio337
Guest
For the grand jury?
J
jen_fla
Guest
excellent point.
S
seekerz
Guest
Then why are burglaries by ‘young black males’ be the -]defense/-] justification for suspicion that his friends are offering? See my post above.
The transcript on the 911 call clearly shows that Zimmerman thought the kid was black; he says so.
S
scipio337
Guest
Ipso facto. How is his friends defense defense after the shooting provide motivation for Zimmerman’s suspicions prior to the shooting?
During the 9/11 call, Zimmerman isn’t sure of the race until much later at the call.
Now his motivation is that he was racially profiling, saw someone he thought might be black, and then proceeded?
S
Seamus_L
Guest
I’m not going to keep speculating about a case in which we simply do not have all the details, but at this point, one thing still stands out for me. There has been enormous pressure to arrest George Zimmerman, from Martin’s family, community activists, politicians, celebrities, etc. If this is really a slam dunk case of a wannabe cop hunting down and executing a black teenager, then I would have to believe that that the District Attorney and some of the police involved are already aware of that. And with that in mind, when that comes out in a trial, the fact that an arrest warrant for Zimmerman was never issued, sure look’s like it could have career ending consequences. To the best of my knowledge, an arrest warrant could still be issued, and yet it hasn’t, and that makes me seriously wonder why anyone would knowingly jeopardize there career.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
No just the regular criminal court.
J
jen_fla
Guest
clarification underline part: i didn’t mean that i disagree in that i thought trayvon actually was doing something suspicious. i just believe that by george’s standards, he thought he was doing something suspicious or he would not have called 911.
S
seekerz
Guest
The defense must needs follow the incident, unless of course, the incident is planned.
If he has another justification, seeing that these people are speaking on his behalf, why don’t they give it?
S
seekerz
Guest
There is lots to wonder about. People jeopardize their careers all the time for all sorts of reasons. Some commentators are suspicious of the prosecutor’s timely intervention. Personally, I’d be very suspicious of anything to do with this case that happened in a timely manner before the burst of public outrage, considering that a dead child lay 3 days on a slab…
S
seekerz
Guest
You believe? Are you familiar with George or his standards? If Trayvon was doing something suspicious why don’t the parade of defenders share that nugget with us? After all, there are millions of parents who need to know what to say to their kids to prevent them getting shot for similar behavior.
S
scipio337
Guest
Guilty until proven innocent…
Why do you keep using the emotionally charged word, “child”? It has no bearing in this case, particularly if Zimmerman is claiming self defense.
“Childen” much younger than Trayvon have committed unspeakable acts, including a recent conviction of a 16 year who killed 2 men for no apparent reason, in the same state.
I agree with Seamus L, let reason rule the day. There are enough investigations going on, I hope they are able to find the truth.
L
L_piperatus
Guest
As I listen to the 911 call by Z, race doesn’t sound like it was front-and-center on his mind. What’s front-and-center, rather, is that Z believes this guy behaves suspiciously: he doesn’t walk on the boardwalk, he appears to be checking out houses, he walks slowly and stops from time to time in the rain, he comes to Z’s truck and he checks out Z.
When the 911 dispatcher asks, Z gives a description: he is a black male, late teenager. Should all black people feel offended because Z said “black”? Should all guys feel offended because Z said “male”? Should all late teenage folks feel offended and discriminated against, because Z identified the person as “late teenage years”? I think it is rather ridiculous to accuse Z of profiling blacks, males, and late teenage youngsters based on his call.
Yet, I saw an interview with a professional (Brent Bozell?) who documents media bias, and he played back NBC News’s “version” of Z’s 911 call. It turns out NBC News severely edited and “gutted” Z’s call, to make it sound as if Z brought up M’s race without being asked first for a description, and as if he only talked about M’s race without giving a description for identification purposes. According to Bozell, the way NBC News edited Z’s 911 call is despicable and it amounts to more than “distortion”, it amounts to an outward lie. Bozell’s interviewer played back first NBC News’s “doctored” tape, and then the real unedited tape of Z’s 911 call. I have to say the “doctored” tape was quite shocking. There must be a special place in hell for journalists who deliberately incite racial strife by committing this type of lie-by-editing.
When the 911 dispatcher asks, Z gives a description: he is a black male, late teenager. Should all black people feel offended because Z said “black”? Should all guys feel offended because Z said “male”? Should all late teenage folks feel offended and discriminated against, because Z identified the person as “late teenage years”? I think it is rather ridiculous to accuse Z of profiling blacks, males, and late teenage youngsters based on his call.
Yet, I saw an interview with a professional (Brent Bozell?) who documents media bias, and he played back NBC News’s “version” of Z’s 911 call. It turns out NBC News severely edited and “gutted” Z’s call, to make it sound as if Z brought up M’s race without being asked first for a description, and as if he only talked about M’s race without giving a description for identification purposes. According to Bozell, the way NBC News edited Z’s 911 call is despicable and it amounts to more than “distortion”, it amounts to an outward lie. Bozell’s interviewer played back first NBC News’s “doctored” tape, and then the real unedited tape of Z’s 911 call. I have to say the “doctored” tape was quite shocking. There must be a special place in hell for journalists who deliberately incite racial strife by committing this type of lie-by-editing.
- Status