# Pitting the Zimmerman trial circus **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 13, 2013, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419 "2013-07-13T19:53:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 37
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/721 "2013-07-18T16:57:03Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > You really are a fucking slimeball, you know that? Yeah, those facts are fucking slimy. Doesn’t make them false. But hey, if it makes you happy to pretend Martin was some innocent little kid, rather than a thug, go for it. I’ll still be right, and you’ll still be a moron, but you’ll be slightly happier. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/722 "2013-07-18T17:01:36Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > That makes it unsupported, not false. Two different things. That’s the distinction I’m trying to get her to understand. You can only assess Zimmerman’s assumptions based on what he actually knew. Arguing that Zimmerman correctly profiled Martin is like saying it’s okay if the cops illegally search you as long as they find something incriminating. > [@](#): > > Apart from beating the crap out of Zimmerman? There were text messages on his phone where he talked about beating people till they bled, and Jeantal claims she told him on the phone he was going to get him self killed. He was suspended from school for being caught with stolen jewellery, as well as pot. > > [Here’s an article](http://spectator.org/blog/2013/07/15/trayvon-crime-school-miami) that talks about the suspensions. > > [Here’s one](http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/judge-wont-allow-trayvon-martins-texts-in-zimmerman-trial/) about the text messages. Make your own mind up about the validity of the claim. Fair enough on the thief part. Considering the lack of supporting evidence on the violence issue - teenage boys brag about fighting all the time, regardless of whether they actually do it - I think it’s a bit much to conclude he’s violent from those. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/723 "2013-07-18T17:04:10Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > [Here’s an article](http://spectator.org/blog/2013/07/15/trayvon-crime-school-miami) that talks about the suspensions. > > [Here’s one](http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/judge-wont-allow-trayvon-martins-texts-in-zimmerman-trial/) about the text messages. Make your own mind up about the validity of the claim. > [@](#): > > Officer Dunn found 12 pieces of women’s jewelry and a man’s watch, along with a flathead screwdriver the officer described as a “burglary tool.” The jewelry and watch, which Martin claimed he had gotten from a friend he refused to name, matched a description of items stolen during the October 2011 burglary of a house on 204th Terrace, about a half-mile from the school. Did anyone ever identify Martin as the burglar? Did the owner of the stolen items view the items Martin had and identify them as the stolen property? And was there something unique about this particular flathead screwdriver that marked its supposed burglarious heritage, as opposed to its more legal cousins?[sup]\*[/sup] - Full disclosure: I used this exact line almost 25 years ago while defending a client for possession of burglary tools; Va’s § 18.2-94 is literally titled, “Possession of burglarious tools.” Acquittal, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/724 "2013-07-18T17:10:32Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Did the owner of the stolen items view the items Martin had and identify them as the stolen property? The finding of jewelry on Martin etc. was covered up by his school district’s police (that’s a whole different scandal that is unfolding) and the jewelry was filed in police custody as “found items”. It took repeated efforts by some bloggers to get the police in that area to get those items and show them to the burglarized home owners (since without pressure etc. they would have just stayed “found items” forever). I am told that the items have been returned to the owners. It has not been publicized that they have been. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/725 "2013-07-18T17:10:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Did anyone ever identify Martin as the burglar? Did the owner of the stolen items view the items Martin had and identify them as the stolen property? And was there something unique about this particular flathead screwdriver that marked its supposed bulglarious heritage, as opposed to its more legal cousins? Isn’t owning stolen property a crime in it’s own right there? I know it is here, but the law could be different. Anyway, it never went to court and nothing was proven, so if you want to dismiss it go ahead. I’m of the opinion that if the suspension wasn’t contested by his family (and to my knowledge it wasn’t, although I’d welcome correction on that), that’s an admission that it was justified. > [@Bricker](#): > > - Full disclosure: I used this exact line almost 25 years ago while defending a client for possession of burglary tools; Va’s § 18.2-94 is literally titled, “Possession of burglarious tools.” Acquittal, by the way.[/size] It’s a good line. Not good enough to convince me that Martin was the carefree innocent child he was originally portrayed as, but I can see it working if I was trying to prove his guilt. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/726 "2013-07-18T17:15:09Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Isn’t owning stolen property a crime in it’s own right there? I know it is here, but the law could be different. It’s not a strict liability offense (and I highly doubt is is where you are), which means the suspect must be _aware_ (knew or should have known) that the property is stolen. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/727 "2013-07-18T17:17:13Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You can only assess Zimmerman’s assumptions based on what he actually knew. Arguing that Zimmerman correctly profiled Martin is like saying it’s okay if the cops illegally search you as long as they find something incriminating. Except that Zimmerman’s actions weren’t illegal. If the cops search you _legally_for something, and find something else incriminating, it’s certainly OK. So, maybe Martin wasn’t a burglar. He was certainly violent enough to break Zimmerman’s nose and beat him. > [@](#): > > Fair enough on the thief part. Considering the lack of supporting evidence on the violence issue - teenage boys brag about fighting all the time, regardless of whether they actually do it - I think it’s a bit much to conclude he’s violent from those. I was concluding it from his violence to Zimmerman, and offering them as support. Yes, if someone who’s never been seen to be violent sends those messages, it could well be braggadocio. When they have punched and beaten a man, it’s less likely. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/728 "2013-07-18T17:23:47Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It’s not a strict liability offense (and I highly doubt is is where you are), which means the suspect must be _aware_ (knew or should have known) that the property is stolen. Where I am, if it’s reasonable that they should have known, then that element of the crime is satisfied. [Wiki cite.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handling_stolen_goods#Knowledge_or_belief) Point being, _if_ Florida law is similar to UK law on this point, then Martin should have suspected that the unnamed friend giving him the jewellery had stolen it, and refused it. If Florida law requires certainty that it’s stolen, I’ll retract this. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/729 "2013-07-18T17:28:42Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > That’s a “clear inference”? No. It’s not. You just made it up. When you say blacks have a disproportionate level of criminality in the context of this case, aren’t you implying that that blacks generally and Treyvon in particular are the victims of bigotry that black criminality have created? That somehow its a bit more understandable to shoot a black kid because a lot of them are criminals? I don’t know what the WSj article was trying to do other than deflect the conversation of racism from a black v white conversation to a blacks brought this shit on themselves conversation. > [@Nothar](#): > > There has been absolutely no evidence that Zimmerman is a racist Well, maybe not anymore (at least in my case) but you’ve got to admit that the early reports of a white dude in a gated community following a black teenager (who looked like he was 12) because he looked “suspicious” sounds at least a little bit bigoted. I think its justifiable to be suspicious of unfamiliar black teenage boys if you have video fottage of multiple robberies in the neighborhood being conducted by black teenage boys but the early reports certainly sounded a bit racist. > [@](#): > > yet many people will still consider him to be one, because they for some reason try to read into non-racist words such as “fucking punks” or “these assholes always get away” and take that as certain proof he was racist. I’m not familiar with anyone that still thinks Zimmerman was a profound racist but a lot think he might have been driven by racial bias in following the Martin boy. I used to think so, I don’t anymore but that’s only because the facts came dribbling out and eventually overcame the senasationalist bullshit the media was producing. > [@Steophan](#): > > How, exactly, was his assumption that the violent drug using thief Trayvon Martin was a criminal _false_? Because he had no reason to believe any of that shit. > [@Steophan](#): > > That makes it unsupported, not false. Two different things. That’s the distinction I’m trying to get her to understand. And what difference does that distinction make? > [@Bricker](#): > > Did anyone ever identify Martin as the burglar? Did the owner of the stolen items view the items Martin had and identify them as the stolen property? And was there something unique about this particular flathead screwdriver that marked its supposed burglarious heritage, as opposed to its more legal cousins?[sup]\*[/sup] > > - Full disclosure: I used this exact line almost 25 years ago while defending a client for possession of burglary tools; Va’s § 18.2-94 is literally titled, “Possession of burglarious tools.” Acquittal, by the way. Yeah, they found it on a black guy. I remember watching this black guy get arrested and he had a long screwdriver in his back pocket and it was described as a weapon by the arresting police officers. I remember thinking “ooh that screwdriver could kill someone” only later did I realize ANY screwdriver could kill someone, I wasn’t afraid of the screwdriver, I was afraid of the guy carrying it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/730 "2013-07-18T17:31:04Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Where I am, if it’s reasonable that they should have known, then that element of the crime is satisfied. [Wiki cite.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handling_stolen_goods#Knowledge_or_belief) > > Point being, _if_ Florida law is similar to UK law on this point, then Martin should have suspected that the unnamed friend giving him the jewellery had stolen it, and refused it. If Florida law requires certainty that it’s stolen, I’ll retract this. It doesn’t. See post you quoted. The rule is the same as English and Welsh law. You are assuming that Martin knew the stuff was even in his backpack, though. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/731 "2013-07-18T17:33:57Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It doesn’t. See post you quoted. The rule is the same as English and Welsh law. You are assuming that Martin knew the stuff was even in his backpack, though. [http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html](http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html) Trayvon’s backpack contained 12 pieces of jewelry, in addition to a watch and a large flathead screwdriver, according to the report, which described silver wedding bands and earrings with diamonds. Trayvon was asked if the jewelry belonged to his family or a girlfriend. **“Martin replied it’s not mine. A friend gave it to me,”** he responded, according to the report. Trayvon declined to name the friend. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/732 "2013-07-18T17:36:05Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You are assuming that Martin knew the stuff was even in his backpack, though. I’m going by his response, which was to say that a friend he refused to name gave him it, rather than saying something along the lines of “what’s this doing in my backpack”. There’s certainly probable cause, but as it was never investigated further, it’s difficult to say more with certainty. So, Trayvon Martin was an alleged thief who presented himself as a violent drug user. Is that better? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/733 "2013-07-18T17:38:14Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > And what difference does that distinction make? Whether it’s true or false. Zimmerman found Martin suspicious and, shortly afterwards, was on the receiving end of a beating that was, as far as we can tell, unprovoked. It turns out that Martin had done plenty of other suspicious things in the previous months. Explain to me how that makes him wrong to be suspicious. ---
**Author:** ![Skip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@Skip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skip)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/734 "2013-07-18T18:02:52Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > It turns out that Martin had done plenty of other suspicious things in the previous months. Explain to me how that makes him wrong to be suspicious. As opposed to Zimmerman’s own previous run-ins with the law - a domestic violence complaint and and fighting with cops at a bar - which totally don’t point to suspicions that Zimmerman is a hot-headed idiot with limited self control. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/735 "2013-07-18T18:20:15Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > So, Trayvon Martin was an alleged thief who presented himself as a violent drug user. Is that better? Well, I’m satisfied. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/736 "2013-07-18T18:23:31Z")
> [@Skip](#): > > As opposed to Zimmerman’s own previous run-ins with the law - a domestic violence complaint and and fighting with cops at a bar - which totally don’t point to suspicions that Zimmerman is a hot-headed idiot with limited self control. Correct, for reasons which have been explained ad nauseum and beyond in these threads. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/737 "2013-07-18T18:24:54Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > The finding of jewelry on Martin etc. was covered up by his school district’s police (that’s a whole different scandal that is unfolding) and the jewelry was filed in police custody as “found items”. It took repeated efforts by some bloggers to get the police in that area to get those items and show them to the burglarized home owners (since without pressure etc. they would have just stayed “found items” forever). I am told that the items have been returned to the owners. It has not been publicized that they have been. And is there some cite to that effect? Who told you? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/738 "2013-07-18T18:36:28Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Isn’t owning stolen property a crime in it’s own right there? I know it is here, but the law could be different. No. In Florida, possession of recently stolen property, unless explained, permits an inference that the possessor knew it was stolen. Nothing more. And this property hasn’t even been identified as stolen, so far as I can tell. > [@](#): > > Anyway, it never went to court and nothing was proven, so if you want to dismiss it go ahead. I’m of the opinion that if the suspension wasn’t contested by his family (and to my knowledge it wasn’t, although I’d welcome correction on that), that’s an admission that it was justified. That’s not how it works. The family may have declined to contest it for several reasons. They may have weighed lost days of work against a school suspension and decided against fighting it. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/739 "2013-07-18T18:47:42Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > The finding of jewelry on Martin etc. was covered up by his school district’s police (that’s a whole different scandal that is unfolding) and the jewelry was filed in police custody as “found items”. It took repeated efforts by some bloggers to get the police in that area to get those items and show them to the burglarized home owners (since without pressure etc. they would have just stayed “found items” forever). I am told that the items have been returned to the owners. It has not been publicized that they have been. So now Martin was a criminal kingpin but it’s all a coverup that only you know about. Well, if that’s the standard for argumentation here, I’m going to tell all about the time George Zimmerman and I were talking on the phone and he confessed the truth to me about how he started the fight and meant to shoot Martin all along. It hasn’t been publicized. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2013, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/740 "2013-07-18T18:55:13Z")
Well, it has been publicized _now_, hasn’t it, blabbermouth! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419.md?page=36) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419.md?page=38)