Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman

[ShobThaBob]

I repeat once more: this is exactly the thinking that was used in the Great Terror in Russia. You come to situations where you say, I lock up a person because he could not proof that he would not do something bad in the future.
When the person has not done something bad, the person is innocent, you can not punish him up for it. Zimmerman for fleeing in this case.

I see no issue if you say I lock up Zimmerman since there are sufficient elements that he is a threat for society, he killed someone.



The you in this is not personal to anyone, it is general, logical, if he is no threat why would you detain or set bail? That is actually in the US law that was linked, you need to estimate the threat the person is, if the person is no threat you should just let them go.

Because his presence is needed in order to ascertain his guilt. You cannot uphold the law or have trials if there is nothing requiring people to be in court.

 

[FoolKiller]

I repeat once more: this is exactly the thinking that was used in the Great Terror in Russia.

Really? Are you sure there isn't any hyperbole in that statement? Let me see.

Only in the event of a capital crime is the accused asked to present himself before a judge to show that he is not a threat to the public and and offer an explanation of what financial standing he is capable of offering a bond to guarantee he will show up for trial. In any bail hearing, for capital charges or not, he is legally guaranteed protection from unreasonable bail.

Charged with possible treason or terrorism without evidence, forced to stand before a tribunal and sentenced to summary execution, possible tortured to give up the names of others who will face the same fate,

Yes, exactly the same thinking. Because Zimmerman has no evidence of any wrongdoing presented before him and courts before being charged, we feel he must be tortured to be sure he didn't act alone, and we feel he should face a judge with a quota for executions, all in the name of safety.

No. Zimmerman has been charged of a capital crime. He needs to show a lack of history of such acts (aka, no similar convictions on a criminal record) to show that in the event of guilt he is not a public threat and what sort of bail he can put in bond as a reassurance he won't flee.

The moment the court system skips straight to a sentencing hearing because an allegation is all the evidence we require, let me know. Or show me how asking someone accused of a crime to show that he will behave while he is awaiting his trial at home is the same thinking as taking them straight to a guaranteed exile or execution.

 

[Vince_Fiero]

... what sort of bail he can put in bond as a reassurance he won't flee.

the rest of the argument is beside the point.

I stated

I see no issue if you say I lock up Zimmerman since there are sufficient elements that he is a threat for society, he killed someone.

Only judge someone for what they did! That is the only point I am making.
Go back to the Burqua, "Burquas are used in robberies so nobody should be allowed to wear a Burqua" is the same reasoning as "someone might fly others did it before".

I think I stop this discussion here. I understand bail, I even accept it, but I m convinced it is illogical since it punishes for something you did not do and that is very dangerous.

 

[FoolKiller]

Go back to the Burqua, "Burquas are used in robberies so nobody should be allowed to wear a Burqua" is the same reasoning as "someone might fly others did it before".

So the burqa ban is based on a preponderance of evidence against the individual used to deem them individually as worth officially accusing of a crime, a process that requires convincing multiple police detectives, their superiors, at least one judge, and a grand jury of their peers to all sign their names to official papers stating as such? And if that person shows they will follow the rules they get to wear the burqa again?

Or is a burqa ban a rule affecting an entire population, with no evidence to back up its stated purpose, and possibly based in xenophobia?

 

[Vince_Fiero]

... a preponderance of evidence against the individual used to deem them individually as worth officially accusing of a crime, a process that requires convincing multiple police detectives, their superiors, at least one judge, and a grand jury of their peers to all sign their names to official papers stating as such?

We are talking about flying justice, that is why bail is set.
Now show yourself the "preponderance of evidence against the individual used to deem them individually as worth officially accusing of" flying justice.
I can not show it to myself, I can only show someone was killed, just like I can not show in the Burqa case the person wearing a Burqa wants to do a crime.

 

[niky]

Uh... are you asking for evidence that said person shot another said person, resulting in that other person's death?

While incarceration after the trial may be in part to keep that person from committing a crime again, as FK says, detainment before the trial is simply to ensure that they stay long enough for the trial to reach a resolution. They assessed him for flight risk, which is why he was detained first, and once he proved that he wasn't, he was set free.

This detainment is not imprisonment. It's not punishment. It's merely a matter of formality.

 

[Vince_Fiero]

This detainment is not imprisonment. It's not punishment.

The difference is pure semantics, I understand the semantics, the fact is force is used to limit liberty, if it is not punishment of a not innocent person it is against rights (see Human Rights thread).

If force is used to limit liberty, as punishment for killing, that is OK.
If force is used to limit liberty, as punishment for the possibility that you might fly justice, that is against rights or you need to provide proof that this person is guilty of flying justice. This is the question that you all duck, by saying he killed and yes he did. Only judge the person for what they did.

 

[niky]

Let's go back to what FoolKiller has said:

You are acting as if there is no due process in this. There is a trial to determine if this person, guilty or innocent, will attend the trial and show respect toward the justice system or has exhibited a historical pattern or current intent to skip trial. They are also allowed to demand an immediate trial and have many other advantages. The fact that only in cases of the most horrible crimes or when they have shown an obvious intent to flee are they not given bail should say that the justice system understands what is at risk in mistreating the innocent. Zimmerman only faced a second detainment and bail hearing because he lied in order to try to make his ability to flee look less than it is. That does not encourage a sense of innocence and lack of intent to flee. But it could just be a guy trying to save some money, and he was given the opportunity to convince the judge of that. Successfully.

This man shot and killed another man. There is no argument as to that fact. In most cases, the police will detain or arrest a person who has killed another person as a matter of course, but in this case, for whatever reason, they did not.

After much deliberation over the circumstances of the death... they finally decide to press charges. He turns himself in, knowing full well that he will be arrested and charged. And knowing he will be given a chance to make his plea and LEAVE the detainment facility once he has proven he is not a flight risk.

He is detained because he and his wife lie regarding their financial status to minimize what they'll spend on bail.

Not because he IS a flight risk.

Not because he KILLED someone.

But because he broke the law. Knowingly.

That's all there is to it.

 

[FoolKiller]

We are talking about flying justice, that is why bail is set.
Now show yourself the "preponderance of evidence against the individual used to deem them individually as worth officially accusing of" flying justice.
I can not show it to myself, I can only show someone was killed, just like I can not show in the Burqa case the person wearing a Burqa wants to do a crime.

Unlike the burqa case, the bail is not permanently taken away if they do not break the law.

Bail is not a fine. It is a temporary restraint on funds to use as a form of insurance. It is the judge saying, "If you flee we will take this amount of money as a fine. Because we can't get it if you flee we will have it temporarily set aside now. If you attend the full trial you get it back, no matter the outcome."

 

[Maccer_42]

Anyone still following this controversial case?

I just watched a few videos of one of the prosecutions key witness being questioned by the defense here. (the girl Trayvon was speaking to on the phone before the incident. Rachel Jeantel)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zim...wrote-shooting/story?id=19504826#.UcyTjW0kyNW

And watched some of the live stream last night.

But man was it hard watch and understand, this woman speaks in full on Ebonics, she seems to give zero F's about whats going on and gives very angsty and snappy responses.

One point that just made me go 'wtf' was how she felt the reason he was attacked (or followed) because of it being racially motivated, her reason for this? Trayvon referred to the person following him as being a "creepy ass cracker" but she failed to understand how the use of the word cracker itself is racist.

 

[Keef]

But man was it hard watch and understand, this woman speaks in full on Ebonics, she seems to give zero F's about whats going on and gives very angsty and snappy responses.

One point that just made me go 'wtf' was how she felt the reason he was attacked (or followed) because of it being racially motivated, her reason for this? Trayvon referred to the person following him as being a "creepy ass cracker" but she failed to understand how the use of the word cracker itself is racist.

I hate to generalize, and by that I mean I love to because its easy and fun but there's a certain type of people from multiple races who tend to dig their own holes deeper and then expect society to pull them out, thus completing a vicious circle. It's not my fault most of those people are black. If there were ever a place for the prosecution in this case to gain credibility it would be in a court room. I guess this girl thought that a stupid idea.

 

[hogger129]

Zimmerman is innocent IMO.

When you're getting your head smashed against a sidewalk, that's a credible threat of great bodily harm or death. Deadly force was used to stop the attack. That is self defense.

 

[Mikeybc]

Anyone still following this controversial case?

I just watched a few videos of one of the prosecutions key witness being questioned by the defense here. (the girl Trayvon was speaking to on the phone before the incident. Rachel Jeantel)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zim...wrote-shooting/story?id=19504826#.UcyTjW0kyNW

And watched some of the live stream last night.

But man was it hard watch and understand, this woman speaks in full on Ebonics, she seems to give zero F's about whats going on and gives very angsty and snappy responses.

One point that just made me go 'wtf' was how she felt the reason he was attacked (or followed) because of it being racially motivated, her reason for this? Trayvon referred to the person following him as being a "creepy ass cracker" but she failed to understand how the use of the word cracker itself is racist.

I'm shocked at how someone who can't read cursive even made it into high school,

After hearing some eyewitness statements and watching the video of Zimmerman's walk through of events on scene with police... still looking beat up shortly after the event happened I'm pretty sure hell be walking out a free man.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

Zimmerman is innocent IMO.

When you're getting your head smashed against a sidewalk, that's a credible threat of great bodily harm or death. Deadly force was used to stop the attack. That is self defense.

Or, he could have done it to himself to cover it up. The kid said himself that someone was following him. I personally think Zimmerman attacked Martin on purpose because of his race. Have you heard the police calls in which Zimmerman said that there are two black males, and each of them include him saying a different age group. Sure, Martin had a gun and weed, but I think Zimmerman murdered him. I mean, lets be honest. If your intention was to buy some Skittles and iced tea and go home, wouldn't that question you as to why on the the way home he would try killing Zimmerman?

 

[Zenith]

You should consider going and reading more about the case. It would be good practice if nothing else.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Anyone still following this controversial case?

I just watched a few videos of one of the prosecutions key witness being questioned by the defense here. (the girl Trayvon was speaking to on the phone before the incident. Rachel Jeantel)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zim...wrote-shooting/story?id=19504826#.UcyTjW0kyNW

And watched some of the live stream last night.

But man was it hard watch and understand, this woman speaks in full on Ebonics, she seems to give zero F's about whats going on and gives very angsty and snappy responses.

One point that just made me go 'wtf' was how she felt the reason he was attacked (or followed) because of it being racially motivated, her reason for this? Trayvon referred to the person following him as being a "creepy ass cracker" but she failed to understand how the use of the word cracker itself is racist.

I'm not an expert, but she didn't look like a very credible witness to me.

Or, he could have done it to himself to cover it up. The kid said himself that someone was following him. I personally think Zimmerman attacked Martin on purpose because of his race. Have you heard the police calls in which Zimmerman said that there are two black males, and each of them include him saying a different age group. Sure, Martin had a gun and weed, but I think Zimmerman murdered him. I mean, lets be honest. If your intention was to buy some Skittles and iced tea and go home, wouldn't that question you as to why on the the way home he would try killing Zimmerman?

How else would you describe two black males other than as two black males? It's no more racist than saying two white males if it's an accurate description. This is an unfortunate incident of overzealousness on the part of Zimmerman, and most likely Martin just choosing to beat up the wrong guy, who happened to be carrying a gun. Zimmerman is guilty of foolishness and creating a situation where a direct confrontation was a possible outcome, but I don't think he's guilty of, or will be convicted of, murder.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

You should consider going and reading more about the case. It would be good practice if nothing else.

Well, I have listened to the case for a total of about 6 hours. I think that can substitute for reading. And what's with you following me around and accusing me?

How else would you describe two black males other than as two black males? It's no more racist than saying two white males if it's an accurate description. This is an unfortunate incident of overzealousness on the part of Zimmerman, and most likely Martin just choosing to beat up the wrong guy, who happened to be carrying a gun. Zimmerman is guilty of foolishness and creating a situation where a direct confrontation was a possible outcome, but I don't think he's guilty of, or will be convicted of, murder.

I just said that I found it weird how he called only about blacks, and all of the times he called, he had said a different age range.

 

[FoolKiller]

Well, I have listened to the case for a total of about 6 hours. I think that can substitute for reading. And what's with you following me around and accusing me?

To be honest, your post did seem to be missing a lot of Zimmerman's side of the story. It's almost like you've only heard part of the prosecution's case.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

To be honest, your post did seem to be missing a lot of Zimmerman's side of the story. It's almost like you've only heard part of the prosecution's case.

Those 6 hours mostly concentrated on Martin's side.

Sorry, FK, I got them mixed up.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

This thread needs a guilty/not guilty pole with the voters visible to the public.

 

[Atarwii]

For the record I'm a black male and pushing 30 so I do have an interest in this case and I am trying to be objective and not let anger or other emotions come to play but I tend to wonder why George Zimmerman felt it was necessary to get out of the car after the operator told him not to.

As we found out later Trayvon Martin had nothing but candy and a drink, but putting myself in Zimmerman's shoes, I think the only reason why I would get out of the car and pursue what I would guess is a possible robber is because I'm fed up with what's been going on (there are other robberies in that subdivision) and I'm trying to put a stop to something, but when a person acts on emotions these types of foul ups happen.

 

[FoolKiller]

Those 6 hours mostly concentrated on Zimmerman's side.

The prosecution is presenting their case right now. The defense hasn't begun.

This thread needs a guilty/not guilty pole with the voters visible to the public.

It would be premature for anyone to make a decision at this point.

That said, with guilt needing to be "beyond a reasonable doubt" I don't see how the prosecution can prove it unless there is some camera footage of the encounter that we haven't seen yet.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

The prosecution is presenting their case right now. The defense hasn't begun.


It would be premature for anyone to make a decision at this point.

That said, with guilt needing to be "beyond a reasonable doubt" I don't see how the prosecution can prove it unless there is some camera footage of the encounter that we haven't seen yet.

I’m not ready to vote yet, but it is starting to look like it was a racially motivated attack.

 

[DK]

As we found out later Trayvon Martin had nothing but candy and a drink, but putting myself in Zimmerman's shoes, I think the only reason why I would get out of the car and pursue what I would guess is a possible robber is because I'm fed up with what's been going on (there are other robberies in that subdivision) and I'm trying to put a stop to something, but when a person acts on emotions these types of foul ups happen.

I don't think a potential robber would be walking down the road as if he was planning nothing. Then again, I nothing about the layout of this estate.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

For the record I'm a black male and pushing 30 so I do have an interest in this case and I am trying to be objective and not let anger or other emotions come to play but I tend to wonder why George Zimmerman felt it was necessary to get out of the car after the operator told him not to.

As we found out later Trayvon Martin had nothing but candy and a drink, but putting myself in Zimmerman's shoes, I think the only reason why I would get out of the car and pursue what I would guess is a possible robber is because I'm fed up with what's been going on (there are other robberies in that subdivision) and I'm trying to put a stop to something, but when a person acts on emotions these types of foul ups happen.

Well evidence shows he on several occasions called the police, was getting increasingly annoyed by the fact that the supposed people who he (Zimmerman) had saw breaking into stuff were never caught. So...to me he seemed a bit like an over zealous neighborhood watchmen, but if he was beat up then he had the right to defend himself, to what degree he brought it on himself has yet to be seen and I feel like that is what is being judged.

It becomes increasingly obvious that this time, he didn't want the person to get away and that is why he ignored the dispatcher. However, the dispatcher isn't the law and thus he didn't have to listen to them, it was advice given to prevent the conflict that happened that night.

 

[FoolKiller]

I’m not ready to vote yet, but it is starting to look like it was a racially motivated attack.

Zimmerman watching Martin or the killing itself? That is the difference between not guilty and guilty.

I don't think a potential robber would be walking down the road as if he was planning nothing. Then again, I nothing about the layout of this estate.

I don't know the nature of the past robberies, but if large items were taken then you have a point. Of course, someone casing a potential target would be trying to appear to just be nonchalantly passing through the area.

Well evidence shows he on several occasions called the police, was getting increasingly annoyed by the fact that the supposed people who he (Zimmerman) had saw breaking into stuff were never caught. So...to me he seemed a bit like an over zealous neighborhood watchmen, but if he was beat up then he had the right to defend himself, to what degree he brought it on himself has yet to be seen and I feel like that is what is being judged.

And that's the trick. If he intended to physically attack Martin or not is the crux of the case. So far, I only see circumstantial evidence that Zimmerman suspected black males of the robberies in the neighborhood. I haven't seen convincing evidence of him thinking that for purely racist reasons.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

And that's the trick. If he intended to physically attack Martin or not is the crux of the case. So far, I only see circumstantial evidence that Zimmerman suspected black males of the robberies in the neighborhood. I haven't seen convincing evidence if him thinking that for purely racist reasons.

Well unlike some, obviously we will just watch it unfold, unlike the more recent mainstream cases, this seems to have more to it.

 

[Atarwii]

I don't think a potential robber would be walking down the road as if he was planning nothing. Then again, I nothing about the layout of this estate.

Nor do I think a robber would be on the phone talking with someone, Unfortunately I've seen people case out potential targets in the dead of night and they are moving about similar to Solid Snake, trying not to make noise and periodically looking around and checking out their surroundings.

 

[Northstar]

Nor do I think a robber would be on the phone talking with someone,

A good one would, most people wouldn't give a person walking while on a phone a second look as it's normal behavior, plus you can always say you were coming back from the store if questioned. A bad robber would...

moving about similar to Solid Snake, trying not to make noise and periodically looking around and checking out their surroundings.

People are much more likely to notice something's not right and call the cops if they see someone doing this as it's not normal behavior.

 

[Atarwii]

A good one would, most people wouldn't give a person walking while on a phone a second look as it's normal behavior, plus you can always say you were coming back from the store if questioned. A bad robber would...

Ok I'll give you that, but if I'm attempting to case out a house at night, especially later at night when people are sleeping or sleepy, I would figure that silence would be an advantage. Some people sleep deeply others rather lightly, I've been woken up to the sounds of a passing car, rain or other sounds that some others would sleep through.

People are much more likely to notice something's not right and call the cops if they see someone doing this as it's not normal behavior.

True, if this happening during an hour when people still up and awake.