Let's talk about Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, and how unbelievably fucked up this all is

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (3571 of them)

I live in a heavily latino neighborhood and have lived my whole life around latinos - literally never heard anyone assert that.

I have met a small number of latino Jews (Arturo Ripstein! total bro) but that's kind of rare.

xp

the sir edmund hillary of sitting through pauly shore films (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 19 March 2012 22:29 (2 years ago) Permalink

it's also a german name -- it basically means carpenter

the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Monday, 19 March 2012 22:31 (2 years ago) Permalink

i've definitely filled out forms (maybe even the census?) where "non-hispanic caucasian" was an option

3hunn O))) (J0rdan S.), Monday, 19 March 2012 22:31 (2 years ago) Permalink

in california they used to say "white not of hispanic origin"

the late great, Monday, 19 March 2012 22:36 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah, that's what it is

3hunn O))) (J0rdan S.), Monday, 19 March 2012 22:40 (2 years ago) Permalink

“We are taking a beating over this,” said Lee, who defends the investigation. “This is all very unsettling. I’m sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, Feb. 26, he’d probably do things differently. I’m sure Trayvon would, too.”

what the fuck is this? by not being outside while black? not going to 7-11 to get iced tea and skittles?

horseshoe, Monday, 19 March 2012 22:48 (2 years ago) Permalink

and of course his main concern is the negative attention his department is receiving because of this

1staethyr, Monday, 19 March 2012 22:52 (2 years ago) Permalink

My black twitter friends tell me that this case is worse because the 17 year old was killed for nothing more than being black. But is the black 17 year old killed accidently by a drive by shooting any more dead than Trayvon? Again, is that any less tragic??

In my twitter conversations I was schooled on “wealth disparities,” and “racial disparities,” and how I was “someone operating in whiteness” that couldn’t possibly understand.

http://blog.chron.com/texassparkle/2012/03/the-tragedy-of-trayvon-martin/

buzza, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:13 (2 years ago) Permalink

(More on that “white” part later)

mookieproof, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:19 (2 years ago) Permalink

Um...there's at least a chance that the shooter in a drive by will be brought to justice. That possibility seems to be in jeopardy in this case, which is most of why it's a big deal and getting a large amount of attention.

Soggy Cheeseburgers (Deric W. Haircare), Monday, 19 March 2012 23:28 (2 years ago) Permalink

what does "it's a gated community but you can walk in and steal whatever you want" mean?

bnw, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:34 (2 years ago) Permalink

You can cut through the woods.

bamcquern, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:37 (2 years ago) Permalink

It doesn't matter what race Zimmerman identifies as. The racism here is an entrenched, institutional part of the justice system: If you want to be nearly assured of getting the death penalty, kill a white female; if you want to give yourself good odds of never being charged, kill a black male. Doesn't matter the race of the perpetrator.

butvi wouls (Phil D.), Monday, 19 March 2012 23:40 (2 years ago) Permalink

I agree that it doesn't matter. was just perplexed when I saw the guy's photo

the sir edmund hillary of sitting through pauly shore films (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 19 March 2012 23:41 (2 years ago) Permalink

quote sounded like armed vigilante was their only option once thieves got past the gate.

bnw, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

texassparkle's bio: "I'm a conservative activist. I blog at The Houston Chronicle, RightWingNews, Newsbusters, and my own site."

so yeah, trolling.

s.clover, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:47 (2 years ago) Permalink

xp Rashada doesn't sound like he approves of what Zimmerman did. He just has an opinion about the security of his housing development.

bamcquern, Monday, 19 March 2012 23:52 (2 years ago) Permalink

from all accounts it honestly sounds like zimmerman is mentally unstable, paranoid and completely unfit to carry around a weapon. and racist as hell, of course, but i get the sense that a factor in the institutional protection for him is happening because the police force that should be arresting him feels guilty that they ever let him have his power in the first place.

also MEGA RACISM, but i can't stop thinking about how CREEPY this guy's specific brand of sociopathy is.

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 00:39 (2 years ago) Permalink

also heavily annoyed that signing petitions for his arrest or just signal boosting in general isn't happening at a millionth of the same pace as jason russell's funtime-let's-all-kill-an-irrelevant-warlord campaign last week.

JIM THOMETHEUS (zachlyon), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 00:44 (2 years ago) Permalink

DOJ apparently taking over the case

i think this is serious (elmo argonaut), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:31 (2 years ago) Permalink

also phone records show Martin had called his girlfriend minutes before the shooting, her name is being withheld at the moment but she has stated how Martin said how Zimmerman was pursuing him, he put his hood up because a guy was watching him?

this is so totally fucked, all of it

i think this is serious (elmo argonaut), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:34 (2 years ago) Permalink

this is so terrible. I started to listen to the call but I just can't. I hope the DOJ gets this asshole into a federal prison ASAP.

plastic surgery dizbusters (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:36 (2 years ago) Permalink

What is the federal angle on the case?

the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:37 (2 years ago) Permalink

the state is too pathetic to lock up its dangerous citizens?

thuggish ruggish Brahms (DJP), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:43 (2 years ago) Permalink

you have really never heard of white latino/hispanic as a category? it's basically a race v. ethnicity question i.e. what matters more to people as a meaningful moniker/identifier.

aka vanilla bean (remy bean), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

many xps

aka vanilla bean (remy bean), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

sincerely, your whitish-tannish-sometimes olive-complected latino correspondant

aka vanilla bean (remy bean), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:46 (2 years ago) Permalink

(fyi I know that's not specifically a valid federal case, I'm just mad)

thuggish ruggish Brahms (DJP), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:48 (2 years ago) Permalink

The Department of Justice's statement said:

"The department will conduct a thorough and independent review of all of the evidence and take appropriate action at the conclusion of the investigation. The department also is providing assistance to and cooperating with the state officials in their investigation into the incident. With all federal civil rights crimes, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person acted intentionally and with the specific intent to do something which the law forbids – the highest level of intent in criminal law. Negligence, recklessness, mistakes and accidents are not prosecutable under the federal criminal civil rights laws."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/os-trayvon-martin-doj-investigation-20120320,0,6763029.story

i think this is serious (elmo argonaut), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:49 (2 years ago) Permalink

whoops, beat me to it

aka vanilla bean (remy bean), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:50 (2 years ago) Permalink

That police chief really is a piece of work. He really does have no sense of what a fool he sounds, I guess.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:50 (2 years ago) Permalink

right so hate crime law I guess? IDK on one hand I guess I'm glad the feds will take this away from fla, but otoh wouldn't it be pretty hard to demonstrate that this was actually a hate crime? I mean obv the fact that the kid was black is a big part of why he is now dead, but it looks more like Zimmerman was a paranoid racist asshole who imagined he was protecting his gated community, not a guy out to intimidate black people in general.

the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 14:51 (2 years ago) Permalink

Not necessarily hate crime law, counselor, you should know better!

Three Word Username, Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:02 (2 years ago) Permalink

i mean, i really have no idea -- is pursuing someone with a loaded weapon a clear indicator of malicious intent? i think there it's clear that zimmerman saw martin as criminal because he was black, and that he pursued martin because he thought he was criminal.

i think this is serious (elmo argonaut), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:05 (2 years ago) Permalink

but can you string those together and argue that zimmerman pursued and shot martin because he was black? that's certainly how i see it going down but i don't know if that's enough to make a case xp

i think this is serious (elmo argonaut), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:07 (2 years ago) Permalink

what "federal civil rights statutes" would cover this besides hate crime laws?

the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

Maybe a failure to charge Zimmerman amounts to some 14th amendment equal protection/due process violation?

butvi wouls (Phil D.), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:09 (2 years ago) Permalink

no way

the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

Way. It's a tough argument, but doable.

Three Word Username, Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:29 (2 years ago) Permalink

as i understand the case, one of the biggest problems any possible prosecution faces is that while lots of people saw/heard the lead-up and immediate aftermath, george zimmerman is the only direct, living witness to the encounter and shooting itself. he made sure of that. his version of events is therefore all anyone really has to go on, absent forensic evidence that might seem to dispute it. i mean, zimmerman says trayvon martin attacked him. even if we have every reason to doubt his character and state of mind, i suspect that his story will be awfully difficult to unambiguously disprove in a court of law. all the hypothetical prosecution seems to have at this point are a few witnesses who say they heard trayvon call for help (or think they heard trayvon, or w/e).

if this case ever does go to trial, it's going to be very interesting to see what a jury makes of it. half suspect that a hung jury would be the outcome every time.

Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:34 (2 years ago) Permalink

i mean, i really have no idea -- is pursuing someone with a loaded weapon a clear indicator of malicious intent? i think there it's clear that zimmerman saw martin as criminal because he was black, and that he pursued martin because he thought he was criminal.

(not personally but) legally speaking, i don't think it's at all "clear that zimmerman saw martin as criminal because he was black". i imagine that the defense's argument would be that zimmerman saw martin as a criminal because he was behaving "erratically" or "suspiciously".

Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:39 (2 years ago) Permalink

honestly, i'm disappointed that the DOJ is apparently only (?) investigating the possibility of a hate-crimes prosecution, rather than pushing for a murder/manslaughter charge.

Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:42 (2 years ago) Permalink

With all federal civil rights crimes, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person acted intentionally and with the specific intent to do something which the law forbids – the highest level of intent in criminal law. Negligence, recklessness, mistakes and accidents are not prosecutable under the federal criminal civil rights laws."

loading the deck a little here, no?

less of the same (darraghmac), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:43 (2 years ago) Permalink

if this case ever does go to trial, it's going to be very interesting to see what a jury makes of it.

What a jury will make of this concerns me, frankly.

carl agatha, Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:43 (2 years ago) Permalink

george zimmerman is the only direct, living witness to the encounter and shooting itself. he made sure of that. his version of events is therefore all anyone really has to go on

so one could conceivably kill anyone, on a whim, and as long as no-one else saw it claim it was self defense and get away with it? really? for real?

ledge, Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

Murder and manslaughter aren't federal crimes, are they? Those prosecutions are left to the state. The federal case would be for violating his civil rights (by making him dead).

any major prude will tell you (WmC), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:46 (2 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I don't think this should be investigated as a hate crime even though it's pretty clear that race was a factor. But I'm starting to feel like any possible justice that gets done as a result of this tragedy will be tangential to the incident in question.

Soggy Cheeseburgers (Deric W. Haircare), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:49 (2 years ago) Permalink

even if we have every reason to doubt his character and state of mind, i suspect that his story will be awfully difficult to unambiguously disprove in a court of law.

Trials . . . do not work that way?

butvi wouls (Phil D.), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:49 (2 years ago) Permalink

i guess it's... slightly optimistic... that there were only two hardcore racists on that jury

Nhex, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 14:57 (6 months ago) Permalink

Either that or two folks who have a really warped understanding of what 'reasonable doubt' is.

Neanderthal, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:03 (6 months ago) Permalink

Most bitter comment I've read about the case is that Michael Dunn got sixty years for missing the other four

, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:11 (6 months ago) Permalink

ouch!

Nhex, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:13 (6 months ago) Permalink

Nightline: Do you think Michael Dunn had options?

Juror No. 4: Oh, yes sir.

Nightline: What were his options?

Juror No. 4: Roll your window up. Ignore the taunting. Put your car in reverse. Back up to the front of the store. Move one parking spot over. That's my feeling.

Give this woman a medal.

Ian from Etobicoke (Phil D.), Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:13 (6 months ago) Permalink

but "he's the victim", remember....

Neanderthal, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:19 (6 months ago) Permalink

You don't even have to say you saw a gun! You just have to feel "threatened," which is a bullshit threshold, because if I came up to a car full of kids blasting music and I told them to turn it down and they told me they were going to kick my ass, that's definitely a threat, by most standards, just not the standard of justified homicide.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:23 (6 months ago) Permalink

The frustrating thing as a Floridian is that all of these concerns were voiced back in 2005 when Jeb passed legislation, famously calling it "common sense" legislation. The opposition (ie NRA members) Jedi-handwaved it away as mere doomsday predictions.

Now they try to sidestep it by saying the law is being used in ways it wasn't intended. If the law is so purposefully vague that even the officials that enforce it don't have a firm grasp on the reach of it, and civilians willfully abuse it with this knowledge...the law is at fault.

There is a lot of civilian opposition to SYG in FL but I don't see it getting repealed for a while. Too many gun nuts, and plus we have Rick Scott, so....

Neanderthal, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 15:42 (6 months ago) Permalink

Michael Dunn got sixty years for missing the other four

That's essentially what Jon Stewart said

A specialist in foolery (Michael White), Wednesday, 19 February 2014 17:35 (6 months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.