1. Gator Country Black Friday special!

    Stay on top of the football coach search with the Insider Authority on Gator Sports with a special discount!

    Now's a great time to join or renew and get up to $20 off your annual subscription! LIMITED QUANTITIES -- for details click here.

The aftermath of racial violence and race relations after the Zimmerman Case

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by MichaelJoeWilliamson, Aug 26, 2013.

  1. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    It's already established fact that you have no idea what Jackson and Sharpton say or do and obviously don't care beyond how you can use them to gin up white resentment in a way reminiscent of white complaints against MLK as an outside agitator back in his day. Somethings haven't changed much.
  2. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,725
    Likes Received:
    604
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177

    It's already been established that you have no clue what Sharpton and Jackson are really, really doing.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. tim85
    Offline

    tim85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    4,164
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,159
    Row, you don't honestly believe those two are for the good of the black community, do you?
  4. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    Not sure why this bolsters your point either. You seem to say because some people commit multiple murders, that this somehow explains away the disparity. Using this argument also implies that black are more likely to be capable of multiple homicides than whites. Is that what you imply?

    OK, but this still does not address the disparity. It is almost as if you are saying, "Hey, the disparity in black on white murder is not worth discussing because so few people actually kill!"

    I think the differential population sizes, when used for victim and perpetrator, weakens your point considerably. Especially given your above assertion that on a percentage basis so few people are murderers anyway. The sheer number of possible white murderers is much much larger than the number of black murders. That is, if all things are equal.



    I note you declined to answer why black on white violence, not just black on white murder, is so disparate too.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    Don't know much of what Sharpton does in his day job, but Jackson has run PUSH in Chicago which does a lot of work trying to advance black interests locally, including education and anti-violence campaigns, something which the ignorant race baitors on TH are always saying he ignores.
  6. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,531
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,082
    Some strange guy chasing after me might rightfully cause me to fight too...in defense of myself...which would be doing nothing wrong then, that is, if we are going to apply self-defense fairly.

    Actually, what former SPD Chief Bill Lee said was that they didn't have evidence to refute GZ's claim of self-defense not because "all of the evidence supported his claim of self defense." Lee also stated he didn't want the SPD to be subjected to unlawful arrest.

    But this stands logical thinking on its ear since probable cause for an arrest should not require police to have evidence to refute what a suspect claims. That would be for a judge and/or jury to decide. They should/would, however, need evidence in support of the arrest that someone committed a criminal act. In this case, the SPD had physical evidence of GZ killing TM and they had GZ's own words that he shot and killed.

    If there was clear evidence that it was self-defense it would be one thing. But it wasn't clear.

    According to police...
  7. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,531
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,082
    And you and others here pander racial steretyping and blanket generalizations about African Americans.
  8. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,725
    Likes Received:
    604
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177

    You know that is not only incorrect, it is clearly offensive.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. DaveFla
    Offline

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,375
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +979
    Indeed. I only have his own words as proof.
  10. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    Is initiating a fight the proper, and legal, response for being followed?

    Complete distinction without a difference.

    The evidence at the trial supported self-defense.

    The lawyers here argued otherwise.

    As the trial showed, the evidence collected at the scene and after the autopsy made it pretty clear it was self defense.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    This is all they have.
  12. Minister_of_Information
    Online

    Minister_of_Information I'm your huckleberry Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    14,430
    Likes Received:
    756
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    In my prime
    Ratings Received:
    +1,710
    You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the connection between the disintegration of social structures most notably the absence of a responsibly socialized male hierarchy and violent crime. In fact I'd bet the plots are damn near identical.
  13. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,531
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,082
    "A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force."

    Perfectly legal in Florida if Trayvon Martin reasonably believed that force against him was imminent. TM tried to lose GZ and apparently couldn't...seems to me that an individual would reasonably believe someone was going to harm them.

    You tried to claim the opposite of what it was and now you want to say there is no difference? There is a big difference since the legal basis for making arrest hinges on probable cause and probable cause for an arrest does not mean the police at the time that they want to make an arrest have to have evidence that refutes claims of self-defense. That is for a judge and/or jury to decide.

    If one wants to consider only the fight and not what led up to it. Still don't know fully what happened in the moments before the fight.

    But I haven't been arguing the court case or the verdict, simply whether it is as possible given what we do know that Trayvon reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of harm given that some guy was following him at night in the rain and even chased after him after he tried to lose that guy.

    This is pretty classic fight or flight. He tried fleeing, didn't work, so he fought.

    Appealing to authority rather than trying to refute my statement?

    As the trial showed...is actually a big distinction but in some ways irrelevant to whether the police could have arrested him (and held him for arraignment) since in order to get to the trial once needs to have been arrested in the first place and for someone to be arrested, the police would need to have probable cause that a crime was committed. And they had probable cause that a crime was committed since GZ admitted shooting TM. GZ can claim otherwise, but his claim is not evidence that it was self-defense since that would be a tautology.
  14. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,528
    Likes Received:
    597
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,831
    Thing is, being followed is not in and of itself enough to trigger the self-defense statute, nor is being asked what you are doing in a place you have a right to be. Nobody has ever managed to produce a scintilla of evidence that Martin reacted violently to anything beyond this.
  15. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    Ok. But that was not the theory that the Prosecution presented

    I think you misunderstood my statement. Zimmerman gave the police a statement of why he killed Martin. He said it was self defense. All the physical evidence at the scene of the shooting and all subsequent evidence thereafter supported that claim.

    THAT is why they initially chose not to charge him


    Perhaps not. Yet Prosecution did not even attempt to advance a theory as to what happened before the fight.
    I already successfully refuted your statement. I was just putting the stamp of authority behind it.


    No. One does not follow from the other.
  16. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,531
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,082
    That's because the one witness to it all besides GZ is dead so we can't be certain now, but there was evidence he was fearful of something happening and that he tried to evade GZ who was pursuing him only to have GZ find him a second.

    That can certainly be grounds enough to reasonably believe that imminent harm was about to occur and for self-defense to apply to TM.
  17. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,528
    Likes Received:
    597
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,831
    And even if one took that, let's say, extra-evidentiary leap, he is still limited to reasonable force. By exceeding reasonable force, the statutory baton went right back over to Zimmerman. This is well, well covered ground.
  18. OaktownGator
    Offline

    OaktownGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    26,913
    Likes Received:
    2,598
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +7,966
    We certainly don't know that GZ did anything to initiate the altercation, but let's say he did... what exactly is "reasonable force" in defense, for someone that is followed around in the dark and then assaulted (in this hypothetical) by someone several years older and almost 50 pounds heavier?
  19. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,531
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,082
    Actually it is. They did a terrible job arguing the case though.

    I was speaking to whether the police had probable cause or not to arrest Zimmerman and hold him until arraignment based on probable cause. They had a dead teenager, claims from the person who did the killing saying it was self defense, some witnesses who did not see what led up to the fight and subsequent killing, and his call to the police. This does not add up to "all the evidence" supporting his claim.


    Simply false.


    If by success you used a logical fallacy, then you are the champion. But if by success you mean you actually made some type of reasonable argument, no you did not.

    One can and does follow the other. Admitting you killed someone can establish probable cause. The police said they didn't arrest him because they subsequently could not refute his further claim that it was in defense of self. But not having evidence to refute claims of self-defense is not the normative standard for determining whether they had probable cause.
  20. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,753
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,616
    Jdr, with all due respect here (and I sincerely mean that since you're a good poster who's viewpoints I happen to enjoy reading, even if I don't often agree with): no s--t!! That's EXACTLY the point.

    No one knows what happened. The police can't and didn't know...and I for one applaud them for actually trying to do their jobs and look for evidence as opposed to half-asszing a police report and reflexively charging everyone they can. That is ALSO a huge problem in the justice system: cops liking the arrest part of it while falling back on the prosecutor's office to actually do the hard work of an investigation.

    And, might I add ...with the precise cause of the altercation unknown...the State still had the burden of proving "beyond a reasonable doubt." Pretty daunting challenge given that massive elephant in the room, so to speak. Yet another problem: prosecutors wanting to over-charge and go for the juicy headlines to advance their careers and/or egos.

    All those clamoring for "justice" in this case are either blatantly ignoring the standards of evidence and/or due process rights in this country...or they simply don't care and want to see a lynch mob.

Share This Page