This ought to be self-explanatory, an all-white, all-female jury simply showcases the bias involved in the jury selection process, how blacks are squeezed out of the process. Nothing more, nothing less. You have a court room filled with white people yet the only blacks are the guards and the parents. It’s fucking despicable but, unfortunately, not at all surprising in the great USA. 
:smack: Oh right! Don’t know what I was thinking…
No, I don’t want anyone to get away with murder. Get away with killing, yes, if that killing is legal. In that case, I absolutely want them to “get away” with it, if by that you mean be found not guilty of any charges that come from it.
You want to ignore the law. I want it followed.
No, he didn’t, based on the evidence we’ve seen so far.
Yeah, keep pretending that. Keep pretending that they haven’t proved that the witness yesterday was lying. Keep pretending we can’t hear him stop on the NEN call. Keep pretending he never lost sight of Martin, and that he hunted down and executed him when he knew the police were coming. We know he stopped, and that they lost sight of each other. Sure, we don’t know exactly when and where they re-encountered each other, but we know that Martin had the choice not to do so, and failed to take it.
Have you noticed that not one of the posters who claim he’s guilty has been able to show any proof of it, and that the ones who claim it most - yourself included - are the ones who have proved themselves least capable of reason in this and other threads? Do you remember that you were shown to be embarrassingly, disastrously wrong last time you decided you understood the law, and could predict the outcome of a trial?
That you think he’s guilty, and the hilarious stupidity of your arguments for it, are very nearly proof in themself that he’s innocent.
It’s based on something she was repeatedly asked, and repeatedly clarified, both in her statement and testimony.
Well, yeah, of course we don’t count that. Why would we? Unless you want to claim that Zimmerman’s broken nose, two black eyes, cuts to both side of his forehead, and the several cuts to the back of his head were inflicted after that gunshot wound.
Yeah, that’s why I said “insulted or threatened” in my post. Which you quoted. But, frankly, it is entirely irrelevant why Martin did what he did, as he had (based on the evidence) no justification to attack Zimmerman, and, again based on the evidence, Zimmerman did nothing that Martin needed to defend himself from.
I’m not impartial. I’m on the side of the person I believe has been falsely accused of murder, and against the people wishing to find any excuse to get him found guilty, the law and the evidence be damned.
Anyone who believes he’s not guilty should be on that side.
Anyone who believes he is guilty really needs to explain how he got his injuries, and why Martin didn’t go home, before they’ve got a chance of defending their position.
Are you really that stupid? I posted a deliberately false statement to show just how wrong DragonAsh’s was. Really, try reading before you post occasionally.
But no, we have evidence he did not try to avoid Zimmerman. He refused to run, he didn’t go home, and for whatever reason he punched Zimmerman in the nose and continued to attack him. Those are not the actions of someone trying to avoid someone.
Which doesn’t prove that’s the only reason he didn’t go home. But he did have the opportunity to avoid Zimmerman, and chose to encounter him instead.
An impartial jury is required. Given how much shit “community leaders” stirred up in the black community there, with their lies and distortions - the same ones, incidentally, that you are posting here - it’s no surprise they didn’t find that the black people from the pool were sufficiently ignorant of the case, and likely to be impartial.
You want more black people on juries? Get the community leaders - your community leaders - to preach impartiality and respect for the law. Not to ignore it, to claim that, because Martin was black this must have been a racist killing, and, quite frankly, to stop viewing everything through the lens of race.
It is sad and disturbing that the majority of the racism in this thread has come from two black people.
Listen, I’ve asked, begged, and pleaded for you to ignore my posts as it’s clear you cannot divorce the message (my posts) from the messenger (me). If you think my posts are racist: quit reading them by using the ignore feature and/or alert the moderator. Thank you.
Sorry, dude, I don’t have Obama nor any other “black leader” on speed dial. Much to your chagrin, blacks do not belong to the Borg, we are - and have always been - separate, living individuals.
Try reading that from the opposing point of view, assuming I were black and you white. Would saying “ignore it and it’ll go away” be an appropriate response to racism then?
Ok, either you’re ducking this, or I’ll not grasping your point at all. You used a statistical analysis to allege bias in the jury selection, based on the probability of an all-female jury. All your numbers addressed gender, none addressed race.
When asked why an all-female jury should be biased in this case (as both the alleged victim and the defendant are male), you write solely about race: “there’s a lot of anti-black sentiment in this country” and “blacks are squeezed out of the process”, for example.
If the real bias is racial in nature, shouldn’t your statistical model use race instead of gender? Unless you can articulate some reason why women, as women, would be biased in favor of Zimmerman over Martin.
What percentage of blacks are in Seminole County?
That depends on how much longer George Zimmerman is allowed to go on patrol.
He knew where his truck was parked. He headed in that direction after losing sight of him.
DD pretty well bombed today at the hearing. At her defense deposition she had been asked, after having the 911 tape played, if that was Trayvon’s voice calling for help. She stated, under oath, she didn’t know. It could be. She had told the prosecutors it was Trayvon’s voice. Impeachment coming.
The evidence that George stopped chasing him is from a combination of things that when put together form a likely outcome. We can hear the wind noise disappear, we can hear him banging his flashlight and we know they’ve both lost sight of each other. You can’t follow what you can’t see. Martin would be able to hear Zimmerman banging his flashlight as well as the NE phone call if he was nearby.
So you just choose to ignore evidence you don’t like. In order for the fight to begin where it did Martin would have to be at that location. This is right by the path Zimmerman was on during the NE phone call. If Martin was there then they would have both seen each other. If Martin was hiding close by he would still be able to see and hear Zimmerman.
I made this statement very early on in the thread. According to Dee Dee Zimmerman asked why Martin was there.
attached to his shoulders? I don’t understand your point. According to Zimmrman they should have been spread out when he searched him and there was a witness to what happened after the gun shot.
without his testimony we have the NE phone call. This is not testimony after the fact. it’s what is happening according to him. It tells us where he was, what Martin looked like and was wearing right down to a button on his jacket. It tells us Martin ran and that Zimmerman followed. It tells us he was likely running because of the wind noise and appears to have stopped. It tells us he lost sight of Martin. It tells us where the truck is parked. It tells us he banged on something.
Dee Dee’s testimony tells us Martin was at a 7 eleven buying tea and candy. It tells us he walked home. It tells us he ran part of the way. It tells us he stopped at the mailbox area. It tells us he lost Martin. It tells us he was near his house. It tells us Martin starts the verbal confrontation with the last thing heard was Zimmerman asking why Martin was there.
We have a witness that heard 2 people run by. We have multiple witnesses to the fight. We have multiple phone calls where the fight can be heard because of screams for help. We have a witness who was there immediately after the fight. We have pictures of Zimmerman immediately after the fight. We have a flashlight at the location a witness heard the 2 speaking to each other. We have Zimmerman’s phone which indicates he tried to dial.
If you were 3 blocks away you would still need to run to get away from someone. He states he doesn’t need to run in answer to Dee Dee’s request. The only rational reason behind this statement is that he doesn’t need to run because he’s already there. His words are accurately stated and supported with a given reason.
It appears from the location that Zimmerman WAS returning to his truck. Martin knew where that truck was parked and yet we find him heading back in this direction. He can’t be hiding here. He has to have moved to this spot or he would have seen and heard Zimmerman the whole time if he was hiding there.
She’s a train wreck of conflicting opinion. In her text messages she warns Martin of his behavior. She knows he’s been in trouble and liked street fighting. She told the Prosecution that Martin was a momma’s boy and would never fight which makes the lack of follow-up after the phone goes dead even more questionable. Unless of course she knows Martin is likely fighting.
About the only thing useful from her testimony is Martin’s account of what he was doing and not her opinion on anything. His location at the 7-eleven, the mail box, the back of the houses and finally Martin’s house. I suspect she left out any negative language Martin would have used when talking with Zimmerman considering one of the witness said the voices were raised.
CMC fnord!
Thank you, crowmanyclouds.
But let me remind Magiver of his own words, demonstrating his thorough, comprehensive reseearch of the facts and understanding of the evidence:
[QUOTE=Magiver ]
[/QUOTE]
And of course..
Wait, wait, don’t tell me: the position of the body doesn’t matter! The fact that Zimmerman ame up with an elaborate and completely false story about what he did right after he shot Martin doesn’t matter!
Please. Talk about drinking the kool-aid…
The issue is about what TM knew, not about what GZ did.
How would TM know GZ was travelling in any direction once TM no longer knew where GZ was?
One surmises that Macgiver views TM and GZ as essentially humanoid versions of Ravenous Bugblatter Beasts.
I don’t think you have those credentials, to put it mildly. You should ponder this: if you couldn’t even spot an easy fish like Saraya, what makes you confident that you think you’re able to spot me?
[QUOTE=Human Action]
When asked why an all-female jury should be biased in this case (as both the alleged victim and the defendant are male), you write solely about race: “there’s a lot of anti-black sentiment in this country” and “blacks are squeezed out of the process”, for example.
[/QUOTE]
In general, I think all-female jury will be biased against Zimmerman because they’d be able to compare the situation with their children and grandchildren. I think an all-female jury would be more likely to empathize with Trayvon walking to get a treat for his brother, more so than an all-male jury would. However, in this case, we don’t just have an all-female jury, we basically have jury that’s 80% white. So that dents it a bit, because white people have a tendency to be biased against black people.
[QUOTE=Human Action]
If the real bias is racial in nature, shouldn’t your statistical model use race instead of gender? Unless you can articulate some reason why women, as women, would be biased in favor of Zimmerman over Martin.
[/QUOTE]
Eh, I’m not that good at statistics or math. I don’t now how to figure out the probability with more than one variable. If you’re good at stats, let’s give it a whirl, I think the results would be interesting.
Which is evidence that Martin was not afraid of Zimmerman, as I said. Further evidence of which is that Martin, instead of going into his father’s house, doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman, and subsequently attacked him.
[ul][li]If Martin were afraid of Zimmerman attacking him, Martin would have gone into his father’s house.[/li][li]If Martin were afraid of Zimmerman finding out where he lived, he would not have doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman, who he had “lost”.[/ul]A person who is afraid that another person will be able to locate him, does not attempt to locate that other person. A person who intends to confront and/or attack another person, does attempt to locate the other person. A rational person, thus, can draw conclusions from the actions of another as to whether he is motivated by a desire to avoid, or a desire to attack.[/li]
A rational person, that is.
Regards,
Shodan