Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't even know how any other authority was able to decide that Zimmerman should be charged with anything after the local guys decided not to charge him.

It's almost like that means that there is a system already in place that allows for something like that to happen. Are you saying that at some point in time there were people that decided we should have a system that allows a higher level of authority to charge someone in case a lower level of authority made a mistake?

This is crazy talk I say!

 Jihadin wrote:
There should have been a trial or a damn good investigation when the incident happen. A life was taken and it does appear casual connect the dart investigation was done. That it went down that ways says a lot on the quality of the police dept.

Florida's fairly weird with the SYG thing, as I understand it. With zero motive, a SYG claim, no real eye witnesses, obvious and evident injuries to Zimmerman, etc. it's pretty easy to understand how there wasn't a lot they figured they could do.

I helped in a investigation of an illegal kill. Its no joke. Our investigation appears more.......Nazi like in gathering info compare to Sanford police twinkle toe perception of an investigation.

 Jihadin wrote:
I helped in a investigation of an illegal kill. Its no joke. Our investigation appears more.......Nazi like in gathering info compare to Sanford police twinkle toe perception of an investigation.

Perhaps so.

So far, though, the prosecution doesn't appear to have much of a case.

This whole weird tangent about how, "well, local law enforcement did a cursory investigation and brought no charges so shucks, guess we're done here" is quite possibly the most intellectually vacuous concept I've ever seen espoused on dakka. I mean, seriously? How many hundreds of cases were brought by the federal government due to public pressure during the civil rights movement alone over uninvestigated-by-local-law-enforcement lynchings, voter intimidations, and so forth? This whole concept is just bizarre in how divorced from history and hell, common sense it is.

tl;dr sometimes local police don't always make the right call. This is not novel or newsworthy

 Seaward wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
There should have been a trial or a damn good investigation when the incident happen. A life was taken and it does appear casual connect the dart investigation was done. That it went down that ways says a lot on the quality of the police dept.

Florida's fairly weird with the SYG thing, as I understand it. With zero motive, a SYG claim, no real eye witnesses, obvious and evident injuries to Zimmerman, etc. it's pretty easy to understand how there wasn't a lot they figured they could do.

It has NOTHING to do with SYG. It has everything to do with police not being able to arrest an individual who claims self defense without due cause. Zimmerman was still going to have face at least a grand jury at some point.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
It has NOTHING to do with SYG. It has everything to do with police not being able to arrest an individual who claims self defense without due cause. Zimmerman was still going to have face at least a grand jury at some point.

Only if the prosecutor wanted to go after first-degree murder.

And the SYG law was why police initially didn't hold him. The chief (who's since been forced out) said as much at the time.

 Seaward wrote:
Whereas, clearly, with bang-up witnesses like we saw today, there was a great deal left to be discovered. The sound grass makes when earbuds fall on it, for example. I bet those lousy Sanford cops never even asked if the earbuds could be heard falling!

A dodgy witness automatically means that a case is so terrible that a trial should never have happened?

Wow. Moments like this I'm glad we're all over here on Planet Earth, and you're over there in your own little reality.

You're claiming a case where the investigation was ongoing and the prosecutor had yet to decide on charges when a media outcry blew up (Steubenville) is the same as a case where the investigation was concluded and the prosecutor declined to charge them (Martin)?

So you're just going to sit there and pretend that the investigation went smoothly, with the full co-operation of every person in the town, and that national media pressure played no part in finally getting a full and honest picture of the events that night. And just pretend that it hasn't led to a grand jury investigation in to cover up. Okay then.

And just to point out the problem with your magical "media solves everything!" scenario,

See, there you go again, misinterpreting my position so badly that I'm left to conclude that you're either doing it deliberately because you can't actually handle an honest argument, or that you're either a particularly dim child, or a reasonably intelligent golden retriever.

I'll be generous, again, and assume you're either a dim child or a particularly intelligent golden retriever and there's no dishonesty on your part... and spend the time explaining why your summary 'the media solves everything' has nothing to do with what I actually said.

The media's role in crime and trials is a complex one, and while by no means always perfect, it simply cannot be denied that media pressure hasn't historically played a role in getting police and the legal system to respond where they might, for a whole host of reasons, simply move an issue under the carpet. As such, your claim that because this trial has come about in large part through media pressure and despite an initial police ruling, is completely ridiculous.

See, while you have taken an absolute position, that media pressure leading to a trial is always unjust, that doesn't mean I have taken an equally absolute, opposing position. Instead I can say that media is an important, though not always useful component, and establish that your absolute position is wrong in that way.

Now, can you just understand, accept that your earlier claim was lazy, and not make me type all this out again. Because explaining very simple things to you, over and over again really isn't very much fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
This whole weird tangent about how, "well, local law enforcement did a cursory investigation and brought no charges so shucks, guess we're done here" is quite possibly the most intellectually vacuous concept I've ever seen espoused on dakka.

You think so? I mean, yeah, it's vacuous, but one of the most vacuous we've seen on dakka? I'm not even convinced its the most vacuous thing Seaward has claimed this week.

 Ouze wrote:
This whole weird tangent about how, "well, local law enforcement did a cursory investigation and brought no charges so shucks, guess we're done here" is quite possibly the most intellectually vacuous concept I've ever seen espoused on dakka. I mean, seriously? How many hundreds of cases were brought by the federal government due to public pressure during the civil rights movement alone over uninvestigated-by-local-law-enforcement lynchings, voter intimidations, and so forth? This whole concept is just bizarre in how divorced from history and hell, common sense it is.

tl;dr sometimes local police don't always make the right call. This is not novel or newsworthy

I think the point you're missing is that the decision to try wasn't made on the basis of new evidence turned up in a fresh investigation and that the public outcry was largely engineered. You really want to compare a civil rights case with one where national media outlets were aggressively - and falsely - pushing their own narrative version of events in order to whip up ratings? I mean, Christ, NBC actually had to fire people for doctoring 911 calls to make it seem like Zimmerman was doing things he didn't, but by the time that came out, it was way too late.

The entire tone of the whole case, long after its disposition had been decided locally, changed once some producers got the bright idea that it might sell. The scenario you paint involves a wide range of people simply deciding not to do their jobs for the hell of it, and the media riding in as white knights to save the day and force justice to be served. Please tell me you're not that naive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:
A dodgy witness automatically means that a case is so terrible that a trial should never have happened?

Wow. Moments like this I'm glad we're all over here on Planet Earth, and you're over there in your own little reality.

When the star witness is that bad, it lends credence to the initial findings of, "We're not going to get any charges to stick."

So you're just going to sit there and pretend that the investigation went smoothly, with the full co-operation of every person in the town, and that national media pressure played no part in finally getting a full and honest picture of the events that night. And just pretend that it hasn't led to a grand jury investigation in to cover up. Okay then.

Fortunately, I don't have to pretend. That's actually the case. What national media pressure managed to do, indirectly, was get some dumbass Anonymous dude to commit a felony that's going to see him go away for longer than the actual rapists. It didn't help anybody.

See, there you go again, misinterpreting my position so badly that I'm left to conclude that you're either doing it deliberately because you can't actually handle an honest argument, or that you're either a particularly dim child, or a reasonably intelligent golden retriever.

I'll be generous, again, and assume you're either a dim child or a particularly intelligent golden retriever and there's no dishonesty on your part... and spend the time explaining why your summary 'the media solves everything' has nothing to do with what I actually said.

The media's role in crime and trials is a complex one, and while by no means always perfect, it simply cannot be denied that media pressure hasn't historically played a role in getting police and the legal system to respond where they might, for a whole host of reasons, simply move an issue under the carpet. As such, your claim that because this trial has come about in large part through media pressure and despite an initial police ruling, is completely ridiculous.

See, while you have taken an absolute position, that media pressure leading to a trial is always unjust, that doesn't mean I have taken an equally absolute, opposing position. Instead I can say that media is an important, though not always useful component, and establish that your absolute position is wrong in that way.

It's an absolute position only in cases where the media manipulates perception to not only drum up a false narrative, but actually create false facts. I understand that I'm going to have to explain this another seven or eight times before you finally get a warning and go away for a while, but c'est la vie.

Now, can you just understand, accept that your earlier claim was lazy, and not make me type all this out again. Because explaining very simple things to you, over and over again really isn't very much fun.

It'd probably help if you actually started addressing what I was saying rather than the strawmen you always craft to argue against.

Ahh Sebster and seaward, always guaranteed to have brilliant arguments, one of my fave parts of OT

 Seaward wrote:
Fortunately, I don't have to pretend. That's actually the case. What national media pressure managed to do, indirectly, was get some dumbass Anonymous dude to commit a felony that's going to see him go away for longer than the actual rapists. It didn't help anybody.

You're talking about anonymous, but not Prinniefied?

Okay, so the problem is you haven't really followed how the issue broke through the media. Well, go read, learn, and then we can talk.

It's an absolute position only in cases where the media manipulates perception to not only drum up a false narrative, but actually create false facts. I understand that I'm going to have to explain this another seven or eight times before you finally get a warning and go away for a while, but c'est la vie.

Well, that's the first time you've mentioned that new line of thinking, and one is a lot less than seven, so that's weird.

Anyhow, it's good to know that you've worked this case as a professional agent, and come to realise there is clearly no case for Zimmerman to answer. There I was thinking this was a contraversial thing, when all this time you had God's knowledge that it's all a media beat up. Good to know. Nothing more to talk about. Now you just need to tell this to everyone else, and we can all get back to arguing about Obamacare.

Bullockist wrote:
Ahh Sebster and seaward, always guaranteed to have brilliant arguments, one of my fave parts of OT

You can't have an argument with a brick wall.

Eventually you just stop hitting it.

Well Sebs and Seaward seem to keep slugging away at their respective walls.

This trial is going to be going for a minute, not counting the appeals or possibility of mistrial. We need need to pace ourselves or we'll be worn out before it is over.

 Ouze wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Bastion of Journalistic integrity Salon.com responds to the smearing of the defe... err prosecution's star witness.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/27/the_smearing_of_rachel_jeantel/

I thought it was a compelling article. Most of the things being said about her (even here ITT) even have zero relevance to her credibility. How much of a "drain on society" you think someone is going to be has pretty much feth-all to do with how believable their account of events is, to my thinking. The letter with the cursive she claimed to write but then it was shown she didn't, that's more appropriate and effective in that it shows she isn't always truthful (not that she can't read cursive, who cares).

Here's what impacts her credibility:
1. multiple stories about what happened with important changing points to the direct issue - who physically attacked who.
2. multiple stories including those that she supposedly wrote but can't herself read. OK you don't write in cursive but you said you wrote. If you wrote it then said someone else wrote it for you -WHY?
3. making claims about it being hard being the last person yet when the phone clicked off SHE DID HER HAIR AND DID NOTHING. She was stoned or lying about a lot.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
This whole weird tangent about how, "well, local law enforcement did a cursory investigation and brought no charges so shucks, guess we're done here" is quite possibly the most intellectually vacuous concept I've ever seen espoused on dakka. I mean, seriously? How many hundreds of cases were brought by the federal government due to public pressure during the civil rights movement alone over uninvestigated-by-local-law-enforcement lynchings, voter intimidations, and so forth? This whole concept is just bizarre in how divorced from history and hell, common sense it is.

tl;dr sometimes local police don't always make the right call. This is not novel or newsworthy

Thats the problem. THIS ISN"T A CIVIL RIGHTS CASE. The MsM, Obama, and the usual hucksters tried to make it so when it was a black kid and someone with a German name. They even doctored evidence to make it so.

Then it turned out the defendant was actually hispanic with "black" relatives. Ooops time to invent a new term: "light hispanic" wink wink nudge nudge.

Want to talk about media painting a bad guy....Richard Jewel....anyone remember him?

edit
wrong first name

 Frazzled wrote:
Thats the problem. THIS ISN"T A CIVIL RIGHTS CASE. The MsM, Obama, and the usual hucksters tried to make it so when it was a black kid and someone with a German name. They even doctored evidence to make it so.

Then it turned out the defendant was actually hispanic with "black" relatives. Ooops time to invent a new term: "light hispanic" wink wink nudge nudge.

I wonder does Obama regret the "If I had a son he would look like Trayvon" comment yet?

Wonder if FLA governor contemplating activating some National Guard units before the verdict hits "Not Guilty"

They probably should.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Thats the problem. THIS ISN"T A CIVIL RIGHTS CASE. The MsM, Obama, and the usual hucksters tried to make it so when it was a black kid and someone with a German name. They even doctored evidence to make it so.

Then it turned out the defendant was actually hispanic with "black" relatives. Ooops time to invent a new term: "light hispanic" wink wink nudge nudge.

I wonder does Obama regret the "If I had a son he would look like Trayvon" comment yet?

I don't think O knows what regret is.

 kronk wrote:
They probably should.

Can they preempt that kind of thing or do they have to wait for gak to kick off? I wonder if a preemptive activation could potentially make things worse than waiting. Not like we can really know, I guess.

 Frazzled wrote:
I don't think O knows what regret is.

Is that the feeling when he doesn't get his way?

 Hordini wrote:

 kronk wrote:
They probably should.

Can they preempt that kind of thing or do they have to wait for gak to kick off? I wonder if a preemptive activation could potentially make things worse than waiting. Not like we can really know, I guess.

I doubt they will. Thats a major big deal for what is efectively a minor case.
We should also remember, this isn't LA or Detroit, this is the South. You take your life into your hands rioting in the South. Warning shots here are to the center torso.

Yeah, I don't see rioting as super likely in FL. It's a good thing the trial is being held there than in some other, more energetic locations

Granted places like Los Angeles could just take it as an excuse to riot, they're always looking for one

 Hordini wrote:

 kronk wrote:
They probably should.

Can they preempt that kind of thing or do they have to wait for gak to kick off? I wonder if a preemptive activation could potentially make things worse than waiting. Not like we can really know, I guess.

Gov can call up the NG at any time.

I would be hesitant to do that though... seems sorta inflammatory to be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 kronk wrote:
They probably should.

Can they preempt that kind of thing or do they have to wait for gak to kick off? I wonder if a preemptive activation could potentially make things worse than waiting. Not like we can really know, I guess.

Gov can call up the NG at any time.

I would be hesitant to do that though... seems sorta inflammatory to be.

Edit... I saw this on my twitter feed and it points out one of the problems I have about Martin:

..."Martin was running for his life and made a phone call"...WHAT?? a phone call to this girl? Not the cops? Not his father? this girl was Martin's savior? He might as well have called for pizza. He didn't [c]are about Zimmerman...he laughed at him...and wanted his girl hear him deal with the "creepy assed cracker"...

That bothered me... if Martin as truly afraid for his life, the way it evidently transpired just doesn't quite line up...

Anyhoo, we'll never know what truly happened. It's up to the court/jury now.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Yeah, I don't see rioting as super likely in FL. It's a good thing the trial is being held there than in some other, more energetic locations

Granted places like Los Angeles could just take it as an excuse to riot, they're always looking for one

Florida has had race riots. The Liberty City and Overtown riots are a couple examples.

Thats Miami in 1980. There are 8 billion Cubans there now.

And in '89, and in the 90s, and as recently as 2003 (but that one was not race related.)

It is honestly amazing to me that many of you dismiss the possibility of riots in Florida, especially when the press and professional race baiters and social media can (and seem to be) pushing race as an issue for this.

Wasn't total dismissal. Probably sounded that way but the way this trial is already going I would think it would be harder to stir the pot than it was before. But hey, maybe I underestimate the race baiters and social media abilities. People are pretty stupid as a whole so....

Another update:



That's bad for the prosecution...

Key witness neighbor John Good dismantled the state’s case against George Zimmerman this morning...
Good said he saw Trayvon on top of George Zimmerman wailing on the neighborhood watchman with a barrage of punches...
Good also heard George Zimmerman screaming for help.

This was devastating for the prosecution.