Trayvon Martin

Let's hope those changes could be used to cast appropriate doubt on the story.

 

The next day? Sounds like a case of "cover my ass".

 

How so? What evidence do you have to support your claim?

You sound biased.

 

But your running with the sucker punch theory shows pure objectivity.

Regardless, who waits a day to go to the hospital when they were just being beaten so bad they had to use deadly force?

 

I read that he went through hours of police questioning the night of

 

If he was hurt so bad, the police would've let him receive medical attention before questioning him.

Please explain why you are running with the sucker punch theory if you are trying to be objective. Also, please do not end sentences with prepositions. It doesn't represent your university very well.

 

You could almost have a conversation with yourself.

 

dude, he doesn't believe a word he writes, he is just playing his role on here. the question is if he acts the same way in the real world. i doubt it, at least in front of "the blacks."

 

do you believe what joe oliver, zimmerman's friend, told based on a phone conversation with zimmerman that zimmerman did go the hospital the following day without looking at the hospital records and eyewitness account?

 

I know this better than anyone. I'm just between meetings and what not, so having a little fun.

 

Anybody else tired of all Treyan all the time? It is deplorable and apparently shows much racism still exists, but...

The Trayvon Effect: Americans as Tragedy AddictsBy Russ Baker on Mar 26, 2012

http://whowhatwhy.com/2012/03/26/the-trayvon-effect-americans-as-tragedy-addicts/


When tragedy strikes, how does one tactfully suggest we’re wallowing in it too much?

I don’t know any dignified way to say this, but the reality is that we all—and the media in particular—are spending far too much of our limited bandwidth on the Trayvon Martin shooting.
***

To be sure, it is a sad tale of avoidable death and of the racial chasm in this country, made especially poignant by the youth of the victim. The authorities’ failure to arrest the killer seems outrageous. But how will this one case, by almost completely consuming the media’s entire capacity—as well as our own limited free time for public affairs activism and discussion—achieve anything meaningful?

When any important principle plays out in the form of a lively and compelling drama, we are all drawn in. But should drama and human narrative be the driving force in our discourse?
Of course, there’s inherent value in talking about societal problems, and making our voices heard. The problem with the Trayvon Martin saga is that it’s hard to see what concrete changes will emerge as a result of its domination of the public square.

With all the media hours spent parsing details, like who said or did what, when, and with what motive, it evokes other compelling whodunits dating back to the OJ case and beyond. These stories are cathartic in that they offer us a chance to express our opinions, to follow a narrative as a shared audience experience, to protest an injustice.

But once we’ve done that, what then? What is the consequence of our appetite—either fed by or created by the media—for one tabloid drama and morality tale after another?

While the vast majority of our bandwidth is devoted to these mini epics, everything else gets short shrift. Everything. Because, as those of us in the media are so often reminded, the public has trouble focusing on more than one story or one issue at a time. So that means that every week we have a Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman affair, or a Tyler Clementi/ Dharun Ravi controversy, or even a Rush Limbaugh/Bill Maher brouhaha, we’re unable to focus on things like the constant loss of civil liberties for all, the growing crisis for life on earth, and the destruction of democracy by corporate capital.
Big, complex issues are a challenge for the media to cover and for the rest of us to grapple with. A compelling narrative, complete with pathos and vivid characters, whether sympathetic or loathesome, is, on the other hand, a no-brainer. Easy to get involved with, easy to care about. And all too easy to put aside when a new compelling story takes its place.

But with so many truly pressing issues, the endless parade of no-brainers is becoming more and more of a serious problem. And what is lost in the Trayvon Martin case is that this particular situation—in which an innocent person was shot by a member of a Neighborhood Watch program—is actually quite rare.

With these fundamentally anecdotal and not fully representative public controversies, at least if we could identify a concrete objective and make some progress, that would be different.


As we go about participating in each “debate of the week,” let’s pause to think about what we do and don’t accomplish as a result—and what else is getting squeezed out of consideration in the public arena. Far more of our public conversation, for example, will have been devoted to the death of one innocent person than, say, to avoiding all-out war with Iran, with its risk to the lives of untold thousands or even millions of innocent people.

 

Well, no matter what happens now, Zimmerman will not be convicted. His case will be thrown out at some court under a ruling that it is impossible to find jurors without a bias on the case (one way or the other).

When you have Members of Congress going onto the Floor of the House and pronouncing your guilt on national TV, it becomes impossible to get a fair trial.

This is why you can't get emotionally invested into cases like this. You have to let the justice system play out. Keep your powder dry.

http://thecongressionalblackcaucus.com/2012/03/26/cbc-members-on-the-house-floor-on-the-trayvon-martin-case/

 

The justice system already went to hell when Sanford PD failed to follow protocols properly.

 

Look at the damage the Spike Lee caused to the 70-year old couple who lives at the address Lee thought was Zimmerman's. Spike Lee was wrong -- Zimmerman didn't live there. Disgusting. Lee should pay for their hotel stay at a minimum.

http://blog.chron.com/hottopics/2012/03/spike-lee-retweets-wrong-george-zimmerman’s-address/

 

Even so, this will still be only the 2nd biggest ruckus caused by a hispanic Zimmerman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimmermann_Telegram

 

If Zimmerman had not been carrying a gun and had not used it he might be the one dead. I agree with most of your thought process here. I agree that it appears there was some irresponsibility from Zimmerman and that he will likely be scared from this. But I still think people have the right to defend themselves using any means neccesary from an attacker. If Treyvon did not want to want to get shot he should not have attacked Zimmerman. Treyvon had no legal or moral right to attack Zimmerman but we all have the right to defend ourselves from an attacker.

 

The only reports I have heard that Martin sucker Zimmerman are from Zimmerman's account. There is no other evidence that I am aware of about who started the fight.

 

That is speculative. It is a fact that Zimmerman followed Martin both on car and on foot. As others posters have noted Zimmerman independently precipitated the incident. The defining action was the decision of Zimmerman to leave his car and try to follow on foot.

 

Zimmerman had that right. You cannot pin it on that alone. Sorry.