Zimmerman Found Not Guilty

[thelakelander]

Shine, in a place like the Southside of Chicago or even our Moncrief, your "reasonable" approach would get you mugged 9 out of 10 times. If a creepy guy you don't know is following you in the dark & rain, he's typically up to no good. Regardless of that, no one but Zimmerman truly knows what happened. There were no eye witnesses that saw how the actual altercation started or what was truly said. All we really know is that at some point in the fight, the kid got the upper hand and was killed as a result.

[sheclown]

Jaybird, how has this been "proven false?"

[thelakelander]

Perhaps it all depends on if one believes that profiling or whatever GZ did to make TM a suspect in his eyes is a form of institutional racism or not?

[JayBird]

Jaybird, how has this been "proven false?"

By the juror saying they didn't even consider race, it came down to how the law was written. However changing those laws is not what Tallahassee wants to get stuck with, it's easier to keep it about race. Bottom line, regardless of race this outcome would've been same regardless. The only change would've been it didn't make national news.

So now I ask you again, you believe if that if TM was dressed same but white, or 'skater punk' that GZ wouldn't have followed? And before you answer, refer to the list of GZ's 911 calls that Lake posted.

[JayBird]

Perhaps it all depends on if one believes that profiling or whatever GZ did to make TM a suspect in his eyes is a form of institutional racism or not?

Unless he comes out and tells the truth, whatever it is, this is impossible to quantify. And by saying this it implies that if I profile someone of my race that is fine, but not of another race. Then it could be racist. Wouldn't that then be racist in itself?

[thelakelander]

Jaybird, how has this been "proven false?"

By the juror saying they didn't even consider race, it came down to how the law was written. However changing those laws is not what Tallahassee wants to get stuck with, it's easier to keep it about race. Bottom line, regardless of race this outcome would've been same regardless. The only change would've been it didn't make national news.

I think it still would have made the news.  It's not every day a kid gets killed by someone who starts the confrontation and that person walks out of court being legally justified in the killing.  The racial stuff from both sides is just keeping it in the news.

[thelakelander]

Perhaps it all depends on if one believes that profiling or whatever GZ did to make TM a suspect in his eyes is a form of institutional racism or not?

Unless he comes out and tells the truth, whatever it is, this is impossible to quantify. And by saying this it implies that if I profile someone of my race that is fine, but not of another race. Then it could be racist. Wouldn't that then be racist in itself?

Institutional racism describes any kind of system of inequality based on race. Concepts like real estate professionals redlining minority dominated neighborhoods, further depressing the land values, and even profiling can be considered forms of Institutional racism.

From wikipedia:

Institutional Racism in the United States

The U.S. property appraisal system, created in the 1930s, originally tied property value and eligibility for government loans to race. Thus, white-majority neighborhoods received the government's highest property value ratings, and white people were eligible for government loans. Between 1934 and 1962, less than 2 percent of government-subsidized housing went to non-white people.

Governmental, social, and educational policies also have been charged with institutional racism, i.e. it affects general health care and AIDS health intervention and services in non-white minority communities. The over-representation of minorities in disease categories (including AIDS), is partly related to racism, according to J. Hutchinson. In a 1992 article, he describes how the federal government's national response to the AIDS epidemic in minority communities has been slow, showing insensitivity to ethnic diversity in preventive medicine, community health maintenance, and AIDS treatment services.

Standardized testing has also been considered a form of institutional racism, because it is believed to be biased in favor of people from particular socio-cultural backgrounds. Some minorities (such as blacks and Hispanics) have consistently tested worse than whites on virtually all standardized tests, even after controlling for socioeconomic status. The achievement gap between white and black or Hispanic students mirrors the gap between the two groups in a variety of IQ tests, many of which are designed to be culturally neutral.In any case, the cause of the achievement gap between black, Hispanic, and white students has yet to be fully elucidated.

Although approximately two thirds of crack cocaine users are white or Hispanic, a large percentage of people convicted of possession of crack cocaine in federal courts in 1994 were black. In 1994 84.5% of the defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession were black while 10.3% were white and 5.2% were Hispanic. Possession for powder cocaine was more racially mixed with 58% of the offenders being white, 26.7% black, and 15% Hispanic. Within the federal judicial system a person convicted of possession with intent to distribute powder cocaine carries a five-year sentence for quantities of 500 grams or more while a person convicted of possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine faces a five-year sentence for quantities of five grams or more. With the combination of severe and unbalanced drug possession laws along with the rates of conviction in terms of race, the judicial system has created a huge racial disparity.

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

[JayBird]

Actually in that respect it has brought many cases to light that could be cast in the same light. And on another note, I find it interesting how classify a 17 year old male as a kid when he's the victim, but when he is the confirmed absolute instigator we leave that term out and even our legal system tries them as adults. As a matter of fact, in the state o Florida, anything above a 3rd degree felony he would've been charged as an adult in the eyes of the law. The same laws that we say didn't give him justice.

Perhaps it all depends on if one believes that profiling or whatever GZ did to make TM a suspect in his eyes is a form of institutional racism or not?

Unless he comes out and tells the truth, whatever it is, this is impossible to quantify. And by saying this it implies that if I profile someone of my race that is fine, but not of another race. Then it could be racist. Wouldn't that then be racist in itself?

no, not really.  And keep in mind that four other jurors denied that she was describing how they felt or decided..

"racist" implies power, actually.

And this is a favorite semantic game of the quasi racist right.  To pretend that noticing racism is racist in and of itself.  But really, its just semantics.

Actually the official statement from the 'others' never said what they thought sentence should be, all of that has been media interjection. And the reason for the statement was they didn't agree with her "Zimmerman was right in his heart" statement.

[thelakelander]

The idea of classifying a recently turned 17 year old as a kid came up in another discussion about this case week.  My response was if anyone thinks someone at the age of 17 is a kid, go out and have sex with a 17 year old girl and see how the State responds.

[JayBird]

Yes Lake I fully understand your point I am not arguing racism exists of course it does. The problem I have is that in my opinion it isn't the basis here. It will not get the laws changed that need to be. It won't even further the cause of race relations because it has been thrown around so much from this case it's lost it's meaning.

Idk, I just get aggravated with everyone pulling out this race flag in this case because it will not foster progress. All it is doing is making everyone sleep better because they feel like action equals progress. Which means now we'll have to wait for another tragedy to occur and hope then that all parties are the same race so that maybe then we can get the laws changed.

Reminds me of that Birmingham mayor who ran on "I wanna do something". Now he is in jail for fraud and negligence and a few other things. Doing something is always the answer. Sometime you actually have to have a plan, a purpose and follow through. Not get caught up with the flashy tricks of the magician.

[JayBird]

The idea of classifying a recently turned 17 year old as a kid came up in another discussion about this case week.  My response was if anyone thinks someone at the age of 17 is a kid, go out and have sex with a 17 year old girl and see how the State responds.

Ha I like that one, very good point!

[JayBird]

Actually in that respect it has brought many cases to light that could be cast in the same light. And on another note, I find it interesting how classify a 17 year old male as a kid when he's the victim, but when he is the confirmed absolute instigator we leave that term out and even our legal system tries them as adults. As a matter of fact, in the state o Florida, anything above a 3rd degree felony he would've been charged as an adult in the eyes of the law. The same laws that we say didn't give him justice.

Perhaps it all depends on if one believes that profiling or whatever GZ did to make TM a suspect in his eyes is a form of institutional racism or not?

Unless he comes out and tells the truth, whatever it is, this is impossible to quantify. And by saying this it implies that if I profile someone of my race that is fine, but not of another race. Then it could be racist. Wouldn't that then be racist in itself?

no, not really.  And keep in mind that four other jurors denied that she was describing how they felt or decided..

"racist" implies power, actually.

And this is a favorite semantic game of the quasi racist right.  To pretend that noticing racism is racist in and of itself.  But really, its just semantics.

Actually the official statement from the 'others' never said what they thought sentence should be, all of that has been media interjection. And the reason for the statement was they didn't agree with her "Zimmerman was right in his heart" statement.

exactly.

Sorry that was my bad, I thought you were posting again how four jurors wanted a guilty verdict. I apologize for scanning and not reading. You are right in your assertion, IMO

[thelakelander]

Yes Lake I fully understand your point I am not arguing racism exists of course it does. The problem I have is that in my opinion it isn't the basis here. It will not get the laws changed that need to be. It won't even further the cause of race relations because it has been thrown around so much from this case it's lost it's meaning.

I agree that arguing racism will not get the laws changed.  It's been a pet peeve of mine over the last week as well.  I've grown tired of people talking about black-on-black crime, why don't people say anything about the killings in Chicago, and if TM was white and GZ was black, etc.  The major issue here is that the some of our laws need to be reviewed and possibly further defined. No one (white, black, green, blue, etc.) deserves to be gunned down on the street for walking slowly while talking to his girlfriend and eating skittles...only to have that killing justified by state law.

[sheclown]

We are all affected by institutional racism.  Until we can be brave enough to have this conversation, nothing of significance will change.

I'm not talking about one aspect here -- where or not some of Z's best buds were black or not, I'm talking about something much broader and wider.

We are all diminished by it, our world and our future is made smaller because of it. 

[Shine]

Jaybird, how has this been "proven false?"

Shine, in a place like the Southside of Chicago or even our Moncrief, your "reasonable" approach would get you mugged 9 out of 10 times. If a creepy guy you don't know is following you in the dark & rain, he's typically up to no good.

There is some truth in what you say – but it's not "my reasonable approach."  The Reasonable Man Doctrine is the legal standard in most every state in the US.  It's not a "black ink" rule of law but subject to interpretation, most notably, that of a jury.  One reason deadly force should only be used as an absolute last resort.  But also, why your conduct needs to show prudence.  In the case of being followed, it would be smart to do some things to ensure your safety and to validate you may be in danger – step into a commercial establishment – turn and cross the street and challenge someone following you – order them to stop following you – run.  If they start running after you – now what is "reasonable" in the eyes of the community? Maybe, may not be.

Being a middle aged white male, I am statistically among the least likely group to be the victim of gun violence.  Red meat and Twinkies will more likely settle me in a grave then a 9.  But consider that part of the population most vulnerable to sexual assault.  If you apply some of the more outrageous comments about Zimmerman, it would suggest a person would need to be physically sexually violated before using force?  The fact remains, under the law, you do not have to be injured/assaulted to legally use justifiable force. 

I would agree, its clear as mud.  And, even if you are right, your life can be significantly derailed.  I would bet if Zimmerman had it all to do over, he would have taken the beating, swallowed is pride, and gone back to condo life, takeout pizza and Netflix. Bernie De LaRonda has been a prosecutor for 30 years.  Zimmerman was only the second murder case he lost.  If De LaRonda cannot get a conviction, exactly what would have.  Justice?  I see vengeance.

I alluded to the Adrian Crump case earlier.  Crump, African American shot and killed a 15 year old white boy in Jacksonville who put a rock through Crump's window with a sling shot.  This was before "stand your ground" and you had the legal obligation to retreat.  Crump, left his home with a pistol, went down the street after the boy's vehicle, confronted him and shot him dead. Crump was acquitted by a jury.  I am not going to get into the merits of this case, but no one staged a protest march saying the legal system unduly benefits African American's who use deadly force. There is no rational basis to say Zimmerman or the outcome of the case was affected by race. While the fact that it was brought to trial without meeting the standard of evidence, and most certainly the fact that it was not presented to a Grand Jury, was a reaction to public pressure.  Today, those seeking to falsely capitalize and agitate on  racial grounds are doing nothing for race relations in this country.  Vengeance is not justice.