1360 replies to this topic

[susieice]

Socio, on 13 April 2012 - 01:02 AM, said:

Police are not allowed to but citizens are not held to those same standards, so even if he was it is a weightless accusation thus irrelevant, they are grasping at straws with this.

Besides that we all profile, you, me, every one, John Q Public can do it 24/7/365.

Yes we do. We use caution and watch what's going on around us, but we don't take the law into our own hands. Millions of young people black and white wear hoodies. We don't chase them all down like they're all casing the neighborhood. If you observe something, report. Wait for the police. Zimmerman even knew they were going to arrive soon and still persisted. That's the difference.
And why would anyone think it a crime to wear a hoodie on the street but feel it's ok to carry a gun into Target? Even with a permit, if I saw that people around me would know it. That's where he was supposedly going right? Wasn't he ever able to put it down?

Edited by susieice, 13 April 2012 - 01:31 AM.

[and then]

questionmark, on 13 April 2012 - 12:19 AM, said:

Neighborhood watches, as far as I remember, have no police authority except that of any other citizen, once you see (where see is the point) a crime you can intervene to avoid it, not once you suspect a crime. In that case you are supposed to notify the cops. Walking, even if suspicious, is not committing a crime... at least in the 20 states I know. And from what I remember (note that I have not lived in the States for many years) it was always discouraged for neighborhood watches to be armed, for most even against the rules.

That does not mean that you cannot ask somebody nicely what he is doing in the middle of the night in your neighborhood... but there is nothing you can do legally if he gives you the finger. And if it is somebody up to no good he will get the message once asked and get out of Dodge.

Maybe in Mr Roger's neighborhood.  Apparently in Zimmerman's, burglary was relatively common despite a roving community watch.  It's a tragedy that this young man was killed.  It could have been avoided had circumstances been different but I believe it will be tragic if Z is convicted without solid eyewitness accounts proving his guilt.  And it seems to me that when a prosecutor goes from not even holding initially, to a 2nd degree murder charge, that external pressure is coming into play and will probably steal any chance Z has for exoneration.  

Martin's parents were all over the news today saying that arrest was only a start (different story from a few days ago when they said they "only" wanted him to be charged) that they wanted a conviction and severe penalty.  This case has become much larger than just being about Martin and Zimmerman.  It's a trial of race in America.  If Z is locked away for a couple of decades it won't change the basic, underlying desire of some in the black community for a conflict that will settle accounts with whites.  IOW's if this case doesn't start the fire then the next one might.  And there is always another one.

[susieice]

and then, on 13 April 2012 - 01:32 AM, said:

[/b]

Maybe in Mr Roger's neighborhood.  Apparently in Zimmerman's, burglary was relatively common despite a roving community watch.  It's a tragedy that this young man was killed.  It could have been avoided had circumstances been different but I believe it will be tragic if Z is convicted without solid eyewitness accounts proving his guilt.  And it seems to me that when a prosecutor goes from not even holding initially, to a 2nd degree murder charge, that external pressure is coming into play and will probably steal any chance Z has for exoneration.  

Martin's parents were all over the news today saying that arrest was only a start (different story from a few days ago when they said they "only" wanted him to be charged) that they wanted a conviction and severe penalty.  This case has become much larger than just being about Martin and Zimmerman.  It's a trial of race in America.  If Z is locked away for a couple of decades it won't change the basic, underlying desire of some in the black community for a conflict that will settle accounts with whites.  IOW's if this case doesn't start the fire then the next one might.  And there is always another one.

You're right. There's an underlying desire from people of all sides. When and how it will finally blow is anyone's guess.

[Myles]

FLOMBIE, on 13 April 2012 - 01:20 AM, said:

These are not terms you and I created. There are certain definitions for that. And the one you gave is the one of dragnet investigation, and not profiling.

How come you are not argueing with those who said George was profiling Trayvon?   Obviously he was not because he didn't get a degree.

[Socio]

Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz: Zimmerman Arrest Affidavit ‘Irresponsible And Unethical’

Quote

Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball where fill-in host Michel Smerconish asked him his opinions of the arrest warrant issued and carried out for alleged Trayvon Martin murderer, George Zimmerman. Dershowitz called the affidavit justifying Zimmerman’s arrest “not only thin, it’s irresponsible.” He went on to criticize the decision to charge Zimmerman for second degree murder by special prosecutor Angela Corey as being politically motivated.

Quote

“Most affidavits of probable cause are very thin. This is so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge,” Dershowitz said. “There’s simply nothing in there that would justify second degree murder.”

Dershowitz said that the elements that would constitute that crime are non-existent in the affidavit. “It’s not only thin, it’s irresponsible,” said Dershowitz.

Quote

“This affidavit does not even make it to probable cause,” Dershowitz concluded. “everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense. Everything.”

Apparently this guy is one of the top legal minds in the US and knows what he is taking about.

This case is starting to look more and more like a dog and pony show to appease the Black community which in itself should be a crime.

[Leonardo]

Socio, on 13 April 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz: Zimmerman Arrest Affidavit ‘Irresponsible And Unethical’







Apparently this guy is one of the top legal minds in the US and knows what he is taking about.

This case is starting to look more and more like a dog and pony show to appease the Black community which in itself should be a crime.

And if Prof Dershowitz is shown to be incorrect, and there is sufficient evidence for Zimmerman to be found guilty, will you concede that Prof Dershowitz was wrong, or will you continue to claim some conspiracy of theatre?

I don't know if there is sufficient evidence or not, but I am going to suggest Prof Dershowitz is a hypocrite and it is just as "irresponsible and unethical" for him to make the claims he is making through popular media, with the possible prejudice that will bring to a case he is not involved in, as he claims the Prosecutor is being "irresponsible and unethical" in filing charges against Zimmerman.

Edited by Leonardo, 13 April 2012 - 01:10 PM.

[FLOMBIE]

Myles, on 13 April 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

How come you are not argueing with those who said George was profiling Trayvon?   Obviously he was not because he didn't get a degree.

I thought that's what I did? Zimmermann observed something and drew a conclusion. That's not profiling.

[conspiracybeliever]

Let me give you a scenario and you tell me if this is profiling or targeting.

A single mother having problems with the school her children is going to is arrested because she refuses to give written description of how she is homeschooling one of the children who had been having problems in the school so she had taken him out. She has several children and supports herself with the benefits she receives for the children. She has done nothing against the law but is jailed. She ends up suing the state and wins. This is all over the local news for months. While all of this is the main topic on the news in the local area the court is, as I see it, targeting single working women who are not on welfare. They have committed crimes but are being punished at the high end of the scale for the crimes. They are convicted at higher rates and the punishment is more severe than the average individual. And of course no one questions it because it is those single mothers, you know, those drug addicted whores dropping kids to steal your money to get money for drugs. So while everyone understands and sympathizes with the single mother on welfare they are applauding law enforcement for finally getting these single working mothers.

Is this profiling or targeting?

[FLOMBIE]

Are you asking me? If this happens on a larger scale, and if I understand you correctly, I'd call this targeting a certain group of people, yes.

[Myles]

conspiracybeliever, on 13 April 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

Let me give you a scenario and you tell me if this is profiling or targeting.

A single mother having problems with the school her children is going to is arrested because she refuses to give written description of how she is homeschooling one of the children who had been having problems in the school so she had taken him out. She has several children and supports herself with the benefits she receives for the children. She has done nothing against the law but is jailed. She ends up suing the state and wins. This is all over the local news for months. While all of this is the main topic on the news in the local area the court is, as I see it, targeting single working women who are not on welfare. They have committed crimes but are being punished at the high end of the scale for the crimes. They are convicted at higher rates and the punishment is more severe than the average individual. And of course no one questions it because it is those single mothers, you know, those drug addicted whores dropping kids to steal your money to get money for drugs. So while everyone understands and sympathizes with the single mother on welfare they are applauding law enforcement for finally getting these single working mothers.

Is this profiling or targeting?

My first question is:  Why is she refusing to give written description of how she is homeschooling.   Most states have guidlines you must follow.

[conspiracybeliever]

Myles, on 13 April 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

My first question is:  Why is she refusing to give written description of how she is homeschooling.   Most states have guidlines you must follow.

I guess she was angry because her son was reading at 1st grade level and after home schooling he went up to 8th grade level. It was something like that. I don't really recall. But that wasn't the point of my post anyways.

[Mekorig]

bigtroutak, on 13 April 2012 - 12:40 AM, said:

LMAO sure Mexicans don't steal a disproportionate amount of cars in Phoenix, and Natives aren't the cause of a disproportionate amount of rapes in Alaska, and blacks arent the cause of a disproportionate amount of violent crime in Detroit.

The government "created" them to do that.......Give me a freaking break.

bigtroutak, you give me a break. Profiling creates far more civil right infrigments than no profiling at all. When you are black, latino, aboriginal or redhead and you get stopped by the cops every time because of your skin/heair color or whatever by no reason, you get your civil rights throw away. yeah, the kid have some problems in the past, his dad´s fiance lives in the neighboord, Zimmermman had no right to follow and persecute this kid.

[Myles]

Mekorig, on 13 April 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

bigtroutak, you give me a break. Profiling creates far more civil right infrigments than no profiling at all. When you are black, latino, aboriginal or redhead and you get stopped by the cops every time because of your skin/heair color or whatever by no reason, you get your civil rights throw away. yeah, the kid have some problems in the past, his dad´s fiance lives in the neighboord, Zimmermman had no right to follow this kid.

Yes he did.   He had every right to follow him.  For some reason, George seen Trayvons actions as suspicious.  George was the neighborhood watch captain.  I would be more disappointed if had chosen not to keep an eye on someone he thought was up to no good.

[conspiracybeliever]

Myles, on 13 April 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

Yes he did.   He had every right to follow him.  For some reason, George seen Trayvons actions as suspicious.  George was the neighborhood watch captain.  I would be more disappointed if had chosen not to keep an eye on someone he thought was up to no good.

The oooold.... There must be a reason reason.  

[Mekorig]

Myles, on 13 April 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

Yes he did.   He had every right to follow him.  For some reason, George seen Trayvons actions as suspicious.  George was the neighborhood watch captain.  I would be more disappointed if had chosen not to keep an eye on someone he thought was up to no good.

Exactly, Zimmerman was a civilian, not a cop, neither a vigilante. The cops told him to stay put and wait for the real cops, not to follow and confront the kid.