Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« One And A Half Leaders | Main | I Almost Preferred No Explanation... »

April 25, 2012

Comments

Threadkiller

Let me start by saying I denounce everybody for everything related to this:

http://mobile.wnd.com/2012/04/film-presidents-father-not-barack-obama/

Just posting a link.

Danube of Thought

"...whether the person in front of him -- Trayvon Martin -- was trying to kill him..."

She fears the end of the sentence: or commit a violent felony upon him.

Ignatz

--Let me start by saying I denounce everybody for everything related to this:--

ROFLMAO.
Too funny TK.

Ignatz

I did considerable research to dig this up but finally found what I was looking for.
And you wonder why I called her girlfriend.
Kathy Kattenberg;

narciso

No, I don't think so, but I think he was a big influence in his formative years, attitudes that may be reflected in this manner


http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/04/25/a-question-for-israels-independence-day-if-obama-was-president-in-1948-would-he-have-recognized-israel/

Threadkiller

I've been doing the wrong kind of research for years, it seems.

Ignatz

Duh.

Theo

The legal issue comes down to what was going through GZ's mind at the instant he pulled the trigger. But, as Ignatz points out, for months the MSM narrative has ignored that and focused on the whole vigilante stalks little black kid and shoots him for walking while colored schtick. The Reuters story dismantles the narrative even if it does not in and of itself justify the shooting.

The MSM cares more about the narrative than guilt. If we found out that Zimmerman shot TM because of a drug deal gone bad, the Sharpton crowd would lose all interest in this case even if GZ was guilty as hell.

Those of us who care about justice do not demand that GZ is innocent. We object to the narrative being assumed as truth. We want the real facts.

Threadkiller

Just saw a commercial for Hannity(much better than watching the real thing) that had a slide show of possible VP picks.

Condoleezza Rice was the last slide. I have not heard her name mentioned. My wife and I were discussing Rice last week.

Thoughts?

Theo

Ignatz ==

Very impressive necklace!

Rick Ballard

Narciso,

you think Obama would have risked his party membership by opposing Stalin's wishes? Why would he have done that?

Batten down the hatches.

O/T, but Obama signals in a Rolling Stone interview that he will make climate change a campaign topic.
==================

AliceH

Re: Obama to make Climate change a campaign issue... was going to post a link to that from Teach's blog (LUN), but got waylaid by the Jan's Whiskey ad.

Clarice

That'll be the ticket. If only all those brain washed 1st graders could vote.

Rick Ballard

Kim,

That's not OT. We're discussing the President acting stupidly by establishing the National Narrative Cemetery in the Oval Office. It fits right in.

GMax

Just when I thought the War on Women was going gangbusters, too. I am sure everyone will happily pay double on their electric bills so that we dont create any of that naturally occuring carbon dioxide.

centralcal

Obama sure looked weird in the clip I saw of him on Jimmy Fallon. Dark and weird. Beady eyes.

MarkO

Poor KK. Now we know she is seeking the imprisonment of a wrongfully charged black man. I sense racism. Al Sharpton leading a lynch mob for the poor black Zimmerman.

She's Kathy's clown.

narciso

How does one even getting into this mindset;


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/25/The-Vetting-Discovered-Kagans-Handwritten-Notes-to-Bell-on-Critical-Race-Theory

P Diddy or Daddy, or something

Condoleeza Rice has already asked that her name not be put into consideration, from what I read a few weeks ago.

GMax

Reports I have read panned Verilli's performance in front of the Supremes today on the Arizona immigration law. Why did they put a rodeo clown in that position?

Danube of Thought

The modern Lynch Mob recoils in horror and shuts its mouth upon discovering that its quarry is actually a Brother.

Who says there's been no racial progress?

All that's constant is that the Lynch Mob is always a bunch of howling Democrats.

Sara

TK: Condi was mentioned a few months back and got some play in the Romney forums I frequent, but she has said no way, plus too many do not like her stance with Israel during her tenure at State. It won't be Condi.

narciso

This gives a little flavor of it.


http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/04/no-part-of-your-argument-has-to-do-with.html

AliceH

via NRO, President Obama’s first official campaign rallies will be held May 5th.

Hey - that's Cinco de cuatro, innit!

GMax

Probably more appropo on May 1st.

Melinda Romanoff

Gmax-

As you know, it's the rodeo clown that's the pro, not the first time bull rider.

Did I mention Bull?

GMax

The red nose and the oversized shoes are the first give away, but then when the job calls for being both glib and quick on your feet due to oral argument subject to socratic questioning, the dufus is stuck for an answer when someone says "hello".

Kathy Kattenburg

"What is justified by Martin's status was an increased suspicion that he was up to no good."

Why? Why did Martin's African American "status" justify an increased suspicion that he was up to no good?

Pofarmer

Young black male, in the dark, in the rain, hiding under porches. Nothing to see here, move along.

DizzyMissL

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/17/v-fullstory/2700249/trayvon-martin-shooter-a-habitual.html

The answer may lie in police records, which show that 50 suspicious-person reports were called in to police in the past year at Twin Lakes. There were eight burglaries, nine thefts and one other shooting in the year prior to Trayvon’s death.

In all, police had been called to the 260-unit complex ***402*** times from Jan. 1, 2011 to Feb. 26, 2012.

Danube of Thought

"Why did Martin's African American 'status' justify an increased suspicion that he was up to no good?"

The fact that eight recent burglaries in the neighborhood had been committed by young African-Americans.

Why do you put "status" in quotes?

Is George Zimmerman less African-American than Homer Plessy? More? About the same?

Are you afraid to answer?

Melinda Romanoff

Gmax-

I actually was commending the professionalism of the rodeo clown in distracting the animal while the rider is down, not the job of the circus clown in distracting the crowd when the performer is down. Metaphoric, if you will, having done both, rodeo, that is.

A bit of a difference.

narciso

I'm beginning to wonder if that old maxim, one is accident, two is coincidence, a third
is enemy action, applies,

Danube of Thought

Does it trouble KK that she is exposed to everyone here as a person who lacks the courage to answer questions that challenge her moral superiority? One might almost infer that she has never been asked such questions.

Go back and revew those questions, Kathy. Quote them in full, and then give us your answers.

I answered yours. Screw up your courage and answer mine.

cboldt

Zimmerman’s own black roots (subtitled "Topsy-turvy life of a good-hearted kid who took bad turn")


A NY Post replay of Chris Francescani's story published by Reuters. Most people get their news by picture, not by reading. Check out the photo of George.

cboldt

-- Does it trouble KK that she is exposed to everyone here as a person who lacks the courage to answer questions that challenge her moral superiority? --


KK makes herself feel good by doling out what she find to be legitimate "shame." But on cursory inspection, one finds that she is making false allegations. She's a nasty bigot and a liar.

medic

There is a question I've been wondering about for a long time. The above article states that the complex had been going downhill because of the housing crisis and that many units had become rentals. My question is was Martin's fathers girlfriends house and rental or possibly on the section eight program. I.m wondering if the government played an active role in moving the Martins into this neighborhood. Something similar happened to my parents, the government built so low income housing and this resulted in a series of home invasions.

Manuel Transmission

Condoleezza Rice was the last slide. I have not heard her name mentioned. My wife and I were discussing Rice last week.

I posted about this a couple months ago. It was supposenly directly from some Bay area bigs. Wouldn't surprise me that it was true, but led to Condi pushing back.

Osawatomie Brown

Medic,

Brandi Green is a corrections officer.
GZ and spouse were renters.
Tracy Martin did not live there.
He visited every weekend.
Sometimes he took Trayvon with him.

Osawatomie Brown

GZ's heritage would be very common in certain Latin American countries.

Porchlight

And so much for that 'George carried a gun because he couldn't be a real cop' meme. That one has died an ugly death.

That was was promoted by regular commenters on this very blog IIRC - talk of "wannabes" etc.

Kathy Kattenburg

"The fact that eight recent burglaries in the neighborhood had been committed by young African-Americans."

Okay, so you're acknowledging that Zimmerman thought Martin was suspicious because of the color of his skin, not because of what Martin -- the specific individual named Trayvon Martin -- was doing. It was about his race, not him.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Young black male, in the dark, in the rain, hiding under porches. Nothing to see here, move along."

On the other hand:

Young white male, walking in the rain in the dark (it's nighttime), ducking under overhanging porches as he walks to avoid the rain.

Young black male, in the dark (ominous) "hiding under porches" (even more ominous), in the rain (triply ominous!).

Anyone who can't see that the young white male walking in the dark, in the rain, and ducking under porches to avoid the rain is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and NOT COMPARABLE AT ALL to "young black male, in the dark, in the rain, hiding under porches," is just a hopeless idiot, man! ANYONE can see that darkness makes a young black male more threatening but has no effect on a white male. ANYONE can see that a young black male walking in the rain is up to no good, because why else would he be walking in the rain? but that a young white male walking in the rain is just a young white male walking in the rain because he can't control the weather, right? ANYONE can see that a young black male hiding under porches, in the rain, is up to no good, because he's HIDING under those porches! And even more sinister, it's raining! ANYONE can see that's completely different from a young white male ducking under porches to avoid the rain!

And anyone can see that there is no racially stereotyped thinking going on here AT ALL. Nothing to see here, move on....

jimmyk

If Trayvon fit the description (not just race, but age, appearance) of recent burglars, plus his behavior, it would make sense for Zimmerman to keep an eye on him. Just as if there had been a rash of burglaries by 60-year-old white ladies, and he saw a 60ish white lady doing what Trayvon was doing, he likely would have kept an eye on her as well. Regardless, there is no crime, and no justification for a punch in the nose, and indeed something admirable, in someone trying to keep an eye on the neighborhood.

AliceH

Kathy - what exactly are you trying to achieve here?

Cecil Turner

Good grief. The burglaries (at least those witnessed) were committed by young black men. Trayvon fit the bill perfectly. Had the burglaries been committed by old white women, you'd have a point. Here, not so much.

And I hate to break it to you, but most people don't go walking in the rain. Those that do tend to move rather quickly because they don't want to spend a lot of time in the rain. Especially when it's cold. Trayvon took an inordinate amount of time to travel not very far, in the dark. Which either means he was travelling very slowly, or with lots of detours. Suspicious? Yeah. Pretty much.

If I didn't know better, I'd think that kid got kicked out of school for drugs, or suspicion of burglary, or something.

Clarice

"Okay, so you're acknowledging that Zimmerman thought Martin was suspicious because of the color of his skin, not because of what Martin -- the specific individual named Trayvon Martin -- was doing. It was about his race, not him."

C'mon , give it up, kuku. There's no evidence that at first, when he spotted Trayvon and started following him, he knew what race he was or would have cared if he did.There's simply no evidence that he was motivated by prejudice. But if I lived in a complex with that history and saw an unfamiliar young man ducking around and not following an obvious path I'd be suspicious, too.

But , I do hope you live in a place with no doorman, no community watch and surrounded by neighbors who are as full of merde as you are. people who don't view obviously suspicious behavior as something worth keeping an eye on and leave you at the mercy of whoever comes along. Just to prove how wonderful you are.

jimmyk

Cecil, GMTA!

12345

The Reuters story is actually quite supportive of the prosecutor's theory of the case, so it is puzzling why people think it would help George Zimmerman in the courtroom or clear his name.

The prosecutor's charge is that George Zimmerman pre-judged or "profiled" Trayvon Martin as a "criminal", and wrongly stalked him with deadly force, taking the law into his own hands, and this resulted in a crime of murder.

The Reuters story explains why the prosecutor's version might be plausible. I don't know if Zimmerman is formally claiming he is not guilty of breaking the law because the shooting was self-defense, but if he is, I very much doubt his lawyer is going to be putting Zimmerman's neighorbs on the stand to testify that "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood... That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

That is essentially conceding the prosecution's case.


Ignatz

YANAL, right 12345?

12345

No, I'm an editor. I'm analyzing the Reuter's story, and pointing out that it re-packages the prosecutor's allegations against Zimmerman and even embellishes them, offering that an unsubstantiated accusation that Zimmerman lost patience with the police and disregarded their instructions not to follow Martin.

I have listened to the 911 audio, and it sounds like that Zimmerman left his car in response to ongoing requests from the dispatcher for more information about the direction in which Martin was headed. It sounds like the dispatcher belatedly realizes that Zimmerman is following Martin, tells him that isn't necessary -- and the rest of the tape is ambiguous.

I've been looking at various reader responses to the Reuters' story, and while I understand that people feel previous media stories "framed" Zimmerman falsely, I'm also pointing out that this media story doesn't help his legal case, it helps the prosecution's legal case against him.

Clarice

It couldn't possibly help the prosecution's case, because it's not evidence and she has none. Don't take my word for it, take Dershowitz' if you prefer.

Are all editors as stupid as you and out other guest editor KK?

jimmyk

12345, a "theory of the case" with no evidence to support it will not get the time of day before a judge. This article contains no evidence. Moreover, the whole "profiling" notion is irrelevant to the self-defense argument. GZ could have been thinking all sorts of stuff, but if he TM sucker-punched him and banged his head on the pavement, as he claims and the evidence supports, it doesn't matter what he was thinking.

Kathy Kattenburg

"But , I do hope you live in a place with no doorman, no community watch and surrounded by neighbors who are as full of merde as you are. people who don't view obviously suspicious behavior as something worth keeping an eye on and leave you at the mercy of whoever comes along."

1. I do indeed not live in a gated community or in a doorman building or in a McMansion in a wealthy suburb. And I totally get your point that people who are upper middle class or wealthy, and who live in expensive doormen buildings, gated communities, and McMansions in exclusive suburbs DO expect -- and, indeed, *deserve* to be protected from the undesirable elements who don't belong in such places.

2. Merde is still shit, even in French.

AliceH

Kathy - what exactly are you trying to achieve here?

Kathy Kattenburg

"Kathy - what exactly are you trying to achieve here?"

The same thing that anyone achieves when they make an effort to stand up to total bullshit.

cathyf
Just as if there had been a rash of burglaries by 60-year-old white ladies [with bad backs], and he saw a 60ish white lady [hobbling along] doing what Trayvon was doing, he likely would have kept an eye on her as well.
(Edited to make Sara grin...)
Kathy Kattenburg

I couldn't agree more, Ben. And I appreciate the support.

Well, I suppose it depends upon what ideology suffuses your life.

So you had George Zimmerman as neighbor on the right, and Trayvon Martin as neighbor on the left. Upon whom would you keep a closer eye?
==========

Kathy Kattenburg

"So you had George Zimmerman as neighbor on the right, and Trayvon Martin as neighbor on the left. Upon whom would you keep a closer eye?"

I would not keep a close eye on either one of them, unless either one of them gave me reason to keep a close eye on them. When considering how I feel about my neighbors, I tend not to assume right off the bat that they are murderers or burglars based on skin color, or age, or whatever other meaningless criteria you use to decide the worth of other human beings.

Your question is so unbelievably stupid I had to fight with myself to dignify it with an answer, but I guess it's that standing up to the total bullshit that makes me.

Clarice

Right, "It's that standing up to the total bullshit that makes me". Where's Robert Burns when you need him?

I expect everyone who's an editor to know the meaning of "merde" ..

Even more stupid question.

So, would you rather have George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin for a neighbor?
==============

Kathy Kattenburg

"Right, "It's that standing up to the total bullshit that makes me". Where's Robert Burns when you need him?

I expect everyone who's an editor to know the meaning of "merde" .."

Merde means shit. So unless you're agreeing with me in an incredibly convoluted way, I have no idea what you're on about here, or what God giving us the gift to see ourselves as others see us has to do with the fact that merde means shit.

Clarice

You're not standing up to bullshit, you've been peddling it ever since you arrived her.You are the very epitome of a deluded, close minded Northeastern liberal woman.

Clarice

**arrived herE****

Dana, you gave her the feathers too often, and they've gone (in)to her head.

I'm waiting for the puff of imaginary moral superiority to mask the indignity of her non-response.
==================

Clarice

Niters. It's in yur hands now, Kim.

KK's googling for the answer.

It's not the color of your partisanship, it's the content of your rhetoric.
=================

Ask a stupid question and end up with stained hands.  Lady MacBeth thought she had problems.

Out, out damned spot.
=============

Or, worse yet, burghers.

Kathy's off banging on the neighbors' doors to ask them their age and if they are murderers or burglars.
=================

Kathy Kattenburg

"So, would you rather have George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin for a neighbor?
==============

Posted by: Even more stupid question. | April 26, 2012 at 11:38 PM
Kathy Kattenburg"

Your posted by ID is correct.

Care to venture one answer, or the other?  ::grin::

Good heavens, Kathy, I've a lot to thank you for this evening. It's a simple, yet so, so stupid question, but I can spend many happy hours thinking of the contortions you'd go through with either answer to the question.
===================

I'm getting stupider.  Have mercy.

Dang, wrong again, kim. It was the thunderclap of deadly snark that masked the indignity of her non-response.
===============

NO_LIMIT_NIGGA

Kathy still hasn't managed to answer Danube's question, although she's pontificated at length about her knowledge of merde.

12345

@clarice and jimmyk,

I didn't say I respected the prosecution's theory of the case. I said I read the Reuters article and it adopts the prosecutor's theory of the case and tries to give credence to it. I expressed surprise that other people are welcoming the article.

if this thread is all about insults, then perhaps I should add that people posting in it seem to have severe reading comprehension problems. I'm wondering if they ever read the prosecutor's charge and understand what George Zimmerman is accused of doing. He's not accused of racism and he's not accused of starting a fight with Trayvon Martin. He's accused of what the Reauter's article describes.

12345

PS: I agree what the Reuter's article and the prosecution describe may not be a crime at all. I assume if George Zimmerman's lawyer agrees, he will move to have the indictment dismissed.

OK, no insults from me.

I think you have a point, 12345.
============

narciso

It's possible, since Reuters, almost always
has a meme in mind, the Burgess matter does put some things in context.

Kathy's cowering under her bed, in shock.

Well, I might have had many happy hours with Kathy's question but I was counting neighbors jumping over fences and knocked out.
====================

Clarice

12345.If I misread you I apologize. For well over a week now we've had people arrie here and repeat the media-distorted facts as truth and I'm get short tempered about that.

AliceH

12345,
I'm not a lawyer. And I don't have time to make this concise, so pardon the ramble.

I welcomed the article as being helpful to justice in two ways:
1) The background info and neighbor's support provides actual facts and testimony regarding GZs character. I try to be evidence-based here. Much of the support for GZ in this forum was in the form of "we don't have any reason yet to think the lack of an indictment initially was for any reason other than lack of evidence". This is a far cry from any conclusion of innocence, but presumption of innocence becomes a strong focus when angry rhetoric buries measured analysis. The National Narrative, in which I most definitely include the repeated bad edit of the 911 tape, was not so patient, and relied heavily on building a story of a sweet young boy murdered by a caricature of a white, racist, rambo wannabe out huntin' for bear, and his release ispo facto "Proved" the police and the Sanford prosecutor were equally culpable. The NBPP "Wanted" posters were just the most outrageous example of what happened when conclusions based on convenient Hollywood "good v evil" casting overtook evidence, and it carried a lot of less-reactionary people with it because, hey, look at that kid (Trayvon at 14yo picture) killed by a white guy who is GETTING AWAY WITH IT.

This public outcry directly led to a number of unusual steps by authorities - Special Prosecutor, Police Chief taking LOA. At this point, I'm still unaware of any specific evidence those steps were warranted beyond an abundance of caution, (though I have no problem with accepting that sometimes when a conflict of interest is charged, it's often best to just recuse oneself in the interests of all parties).

2) The affidavit of probable cause was for murder 2. That requires the Prosecutor prove beyond reasonable doubt that GZ acted with depraved mind. The specific citing of depraved mind in the affidavit seems to be based on assertions that a)GZ profiled TM, GZ immediately assumed TM was a criminal, GZ "felt" TM did not belong in the community b) GZ expressed frustration about actual criminals from prior crimes having previously gotten away before police could arrive.

To make their case at trial, the prosecution will need present evidence to convince a jury that GZ's actions were UNreasonable, that GZ had no reasonable explanation for interpreting TMs actions as "suspicious" and warranting follow up (calling police, keeping track and following him) but instead showed GZ had CONCLUDED through presumption of guilt and with prejudice pursued TM.

The Reuter's piece weakens a clear case of prejudicial and reckless targeting. It provides a context wherein it may be shown how a reasonable person might act when seeing a stranger in a residential community who is not apparently going TO a resident's home, nor coming FROM a resident's home might act. That is, a reasonable person would find that 'suspicious', and among many possibilities, a reasonable person would have to include the possibility of criminal intent. And that furthermore, a caring person would not ignore it but would in fact take action.

None of this has bearing on a plea of self-defense. That goes to what evidence is presented as to the last minute (or less) up to the shooting. It does, however, suggest that Murder2 will not stand up.

Sorry this is long - and still I've left things out, but since you probably haven't read every comment on the last 20 Zimmerman threads, figured I'd give it a shot.

Kathy Kattenburg

"It provides a context wherein it may be shown how a reasonable person might act when seeing a stranger in a residential community who is not apparently going TO a resident's home, nor coming FROM a resident's home might act."

But Trayvon Martin WAS "apparently going TO a resident's home or coming FROM a resident's home," and his behavior as the known facts indicate WAS that of someone who was doing the above. And you (general you) keep referring to "a stranger" who is not apparently doing these things when what you (general you) mean is a BLACK MALE doing these things. This IS racial profiling. When this is pointed out to you, you fall back on the "rash of African American burglaries" argument, and make bad jokes about little old white ladies. But then you go right back to making your argument be about the reasonableness of suspecting ANY stranger who does not seem to belong in a residential community, and react with outrage when it is pointed out to you that you only have one particular demographic of stranger in mind.

If you truly believe in the goodness and appropriateness of holding a heightened suspicion of young black males, then it's dishonest and disingenuous to talk about reasonable suspicions about strangers, when you clearly and demonstrably do not have all or any strangers in mind, but ONLY young black male strangers.

Take responsibility for your belief that black males -- except perhaps for obviously 85-year-old black males and four-year-old black males -- are inherently suspicious and deserving of being assumed to be up to no good if they are in a neighborhood where they "don't belong."

Annoying Old Guy
But Trayvon Martin WAS "apparently going TO a resident's home or coming FROM a resident's home," and his behavior as the known facts indicate WAS that of someone who was doing the above.

No. Have you never read the 911 transcript, or looked at any of the timelines? We can not know for certain, but what evidence does exist is all against your claim here. No need to thank me for the update, I'm just standing up to BS.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Have you never read the 911 transcript, or looked at any of the timelines? We can not know for certain, but what evidence does exist is all against your claim here."

Yes, I have, and it's well established that Trayvon Martin went out to get Skittles and Arizona tea from a convenience store that was minutes away from his home.

It's very revealing that you accuse me of not having read the 911 transcript yet don't post any link to it yourself.

AliceH

But Trayvon Martin WAS "apparently going TO a resident's home or coming FROM a resident's home," and his behavior as the known facts indicate WAS that of someone who was doing the above.

What is the evidence for this?

The timeline between the purchase at the 7-11 and the time to walk TO where he was staying is much too long to support a contention that he was APPARENTLY going TO a resident's home. And by "Apparently" I mean "Appeared to be" to an observer. ANY observer.

Explaining now that TM was hanging around, chatting to friends, taking a perfectly legal and innocent wander about the community is not information available to an observer. It is a post hoc justification based in part on speculation for why TM might have been dawdling. Innocent and true as all that may be, it is not at all contrary to the statement "not apparently going TO a resident's home, nor coming FROM a resident's home". In fact, it supports it.

Kathy Kattenburg

"The timeline between the purchase at the 7-11 and the time to walk TO where he was staying is much too long to support a contention that he was APPARENTLY going TO a resident's home. And by "Apparently" I mean "Appeared to be" to an observer. ANY observer."

Hey, AliceH. Do you see the quotation marks I inserted in my comment, here:

But Trayvon Martin WAS "APPARENTLY going TO a resident's home or coming FROM a resident's home," and his behavior as the known facts indicate WAS that of someone who was doing the above.

My caps, to help you with your visual challenge. Those quotes around that phrase mean I was using words that were not my own, that someone else had used. Gee, I wonder who that someone else could be? Oh yeah! It was you! LOL.

Kathy Kattenburg

"it is not at all contrary to the statement 'not apparently going TO a resident's home, nor coming FROM a resident's home.' In fact, it supports it."

This is fascinating. How do you work out telling me your own word "apparently" is inaccurate when I quote it, but accurate when you quote it AGAIN in the very same comment that you're telling me it's NOT accurate?

AliceH

Kathy, I have been polite to you. There was not only no call to snipe, but it was an unfounded accusation at that.

In my comment, I first quoted a section of your comment (italized). The part in quotes was of course where you were quoting me, but it was your argument that my (quoted) remark meant something other than what I said which I then proceeded to argue.

I'll try this another way. I said Trayvon was not apparently going to or coming from a residence. You said he WAS (quoting me) apparently going to or coming from a residence.

You did not explain why you disagreed with my statement which was about appearances. Your entire argument was "but he was".

All this just gets us to the point of setting the context for my followup, which was to ask you what evidence there was that this was APPARENT, at the time, to any observer.

I added 2 more points.

First, how the elapsed time between known points precludes the possibility of a pedestrian walking with a clear destination in mind, because TM never got to his destination when there was more than enough time for him to do so, even walking slowly. This means, he was not walking directly home. It also means he would not APPEAR to be walking directly home to someone observing.

Second, explanations about what he was actually doing are fine as far as they go, but those explanations have no bearing on what has already been established as to how that would APPEAR. IOW the appearance of someone wandering around, chatting to friend does is not the appearance of a pedestrian who is heading home.

I hope I've clarified things and you reread and consider my prior post a bit more before responding.

Kathy Kattenburg

"First, how the elapsed time between known points precludes the possibility of a pedestrian walking with a clear destination in mind, because TM never got to his destination when there was more than enough time for him to do so, even walking slowly. This means, he was not walking directly home."

1. No, it doesn't. First, "more than enough time to get home" is a subjective measurement. Second, it's irrelevant to the fact that GZ killed him. Walking slowly, or more slowly than you think a young black male should be walking, is neither, in and of itself, cause for suspicion of anything, nor is it a justification for shooting someone. It's completely irrelevant. And don't you tell me that no one is suggesting walking slow is a justification for shooting someone dead, because that's exactly what you're suggesting.

2. One possible reason that TM never got to his destination was that he was being followed by a total stranger for no discernible reason, and then actually accosted by that total stranger. And he chose to stand his ground rather than run. That IS why he never got to his destination, isn't it?

"Second, explanations about what he was actually doing are fine as far as they go, but those explanations have no bearing on what has already been established as to how that would APPEAR. IOW the appearance of someone wandering around, chatting to friend does is not the appearance of a pedestrian who is heading home."

If he was chatting to a friend (which he wasn't), that is not suspicious behavior. If he was walking slowly, and/or looking around him as he walked, that is not suspicious behavior. I actually look around me all the time when I'm walking. I often look up at the gorgeous blue sky, and the fluffy clouds, when I walk. Sometimes I look up at the tops of the trees, enjoying the way they move in the breeze. Sometimes I glance at people going by. None of this has ever earned me an accusation of being suspicious, but of course that's because I am a late-middle-aged white woman, and so am permitted to do these things without fear of being thought a potential criminal. Trayvon Martin was not allowed to do these things, or anything similar w/o attracting the suspicion of an overzealous neighborhood watch volunteer (looking around at the houses, at the rain on the leaves, anything) because he was a young black male.

In closing, I will just reiterate that NONE of the scenarios and possibilities you are imagining or positing about TM's behavior, walking style, etc., etc., etc., have any rational connection to a conclusion that he was or even might be up to no good. GZ made all sorts of wild assumptions about TM that had no basis in fact and no justification in his behavior: that he was on drugs, that he was like all those "others" who "always get away," that something was "wrong" with him, that he didn't know what his "deal" was, and on and on and on.

That's the bottom line here. Ultimately, all these challenges to explain why TM was walking slowly (if he was) or why he was "stopping" (if he was) or why he was "looking around" or why he was "hiding" (i.e., ducking) under porches, do nothing to explain why GZ shot TM dead. Nothing whatsoever. Ultimately, these are ALL misdirects being employed to obscure the fact that TM was shot dead for no justifiable reason.

Have Blue

Kathy - GZ shot TM because TM commited a felonious assault on GZ.

TM attacked GZ with intent to commit GBH or murder. As a direct result he was shot.

AliceH

Okay.

Kathy Kattenburg

Have Blue,

Believe that if you wish (can I stop you?) but there are no facts or evidence to support it.

All I've been hearing here is about how you all are just drawing the conclusion that all the facts and evidence point to, but in reality the facts and evidence that we have all point the other way. Trayvon Martin was the unarmed teenager carrying Skittles and tea, and George Zimmerman was the 28-year-old neighborhood watch volunteer carrying a concealed handgun. It just defies all logic and reason to say that TM caused his own death when he did not have the gun and GZ did.

But you will believe what you believe. So carry on.

Have Blue

Kathy - All of the facts and evidence supports that conclusion.

There is no evidence that contradicts that.

The state investigator testified under oath that there is no evidence otherwise.

Annoying Old Guy
it's well established that Trayvon Martin went out to get Skittles and Arizona tea from a convenience store that was minutes away from his home.

Where is that well established? It's very revealing that you make this claim yet don't post any link to it yourself.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Where is that well established? It's very revealing that you make this claim yet don't post any link to it yourself."

Ha! I was hoping you'd say this:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/what-happened-trayvon-martin-explained

There is a lot of information on this page -- it's regularly updated with new information -- so if you're looking for stuff about the 911 tapes, you'll have to scroll down.

NO_LIMIT_NIGGA

Several more loads of merde shoveled into the thread by Kathy, but she still hasn't answered Danube's question.

Kathy Kattenburg

"... she still hasn't answered Danube's question."

That's right, I haven't. I will not answer stupid questions that have nothing to do with Trayvon Martin being shot to death by a man armed with a concealed handgun he wasn't supposed to be carrying.

Melinda Romanoff

And there will be no stopping of the abuse for the ridiculous hair color you're using.

Have Blue

Trayvon Martin assualted George Zimmerman in an attempt to cause grievious bodily harm or death. He was shot by George Zimmerman with a licensed handgun he had every right to be carrying, in a perfectly legal act of self defense. The state has conceded that there is no evidence to the contrary, much less proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

The only crime commited that evening was committed by Trayvon Martin.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame