# The pitting of people who mistakenly conflate justice with legality (Martin/Zimmerman related) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 20, 2013, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028 "2013-07-20T13:04:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 49
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/961 "2013-09-19T18:15:53Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Most importantly, you’ve failed to provide the explanation of the evidence that shows the only reasonable conclusion is guilt. I of course don’t speak for **Stoid** , but I suspect that much of what fuels your butting heads with her is disparate ideas of what “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt” means. To me, and I think to you, it means that, having considered all possible conclusions that could be drawn from the evidence, the only reasonable one is guilt. Even if one believes the accused to be guilty, unless reasonable scenarios in which they are _not_ guilty can be disproved by the evidence, they are not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. To **Stoid** , I think it means that a person of sound mind believes that the likeliest conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence is guilt. That is to say, I don’t believe **Stoid** views the step of considering conclusions other than the one she’s drawn, and evaluating them for reasonableness, as being necessary. Is that correct, **Stoid**? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/962 "2013-09-19T20:22:00Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > To **Stoid** , I think it means that a person of sound mind believes that the likeliest conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence is guilt. That is to say, I don’t believe **Stoid** views the step of considering conclusions other than the one she’s drawn, and evaluating them for reasonableness, as being necessary. > > Is that correct, **Stoid**? No, it’s not correct. Why would I assume “likeliest” = “Beyond a reasonable doubt”? Beyond a reasonable doubt means exactly that: whatever doubts that may remain, if any, are not genuinely reasonable. What fuels our butting heads is extremely simple and I’ve said what it is: Steophan is incapable of seeing it any way other than the way he sees it, AND he is absolutely convinced that anyone who actually does view it differently than he does is ignorant, or stupid, or dishonest, or intellectually dishonest, or unreasonable, or irrational, or hopelessly biased, or some combination. That belief/POV leads inexorably to his dismissing/ignoring anything and everything that doesn’t match his view of it. Since, for Steophan, nothing really exists or is the truth except what Steophan believes is real or true, it is genuinely **impossible** to have any kind of debate, dialogue or discussion about it. My post 804: > [@Stoid](#): > > You are certainly entitled to disagree that the evidence is compelling enough to come to that conclusion, and there is nothing wrong with that. > > But it remains true that intelligent, reasonable, fair people see it entirely differently than you do. And there’s nothing wrong with that, either. > > _ **What is truly clear to genuinely fair-minded, unbiased people looking at this situation is that the nature of what we genuinely know for sure about what happened that night is such that equally intelligent, reasonable, fair-minded people can come to radically different conclusions about the underlying truth of what happened that night.** _ > > And by “know for sure” I mean genuine facts… **The things was about which everybody can absolutely agree:** > George Zimmerman was legally carrying a concealed weapon that night. > Traybon Martin was legally walking home from purchasing candy and soda at the market. > George Zimmerman saw Traybon Martin and had some degree of concern about who he was and why he was there. > George Zimmerman called the nonemergency dispatch, and we know the precise contents of this conversation. > We know that Martin and Jeantel were on the phone off and on most of that time. > We know Martin was uncomfortable, and at one point ran towards his father’s house, and that George Zimmerman lost sight of him for some period of time. > We know that George Zimmerman got out of his truck to follow Martin. > We know that Martin spoke first to Zimmerman. > We know that there was an altercation between the two men that happened on the path between the townhomes. > We know that at one point for a few moments at least Martin was on top of Zimmerman. > Will know that someone was screaming virtually continuously for at least a minute or two and they were screaming help and they sounded very scared. > We know that George Zimmerman shot Traybon Martin. > We know that the screaming stopped at the moment of the shot. > We that George Zimmerman had scrapes on his head. > We know that George Zimmerman was on top of Traybon Martin’s body after he shot him. > We know that Traybon Martin did not have any scrapes or cuts except for a small one on his hand. > > (I am on my iPad dictating, sorry about the misspellings…) > > I may have missed one or two things, but I am fairly certain that that is a correct representation of t **he facts that all of us, no matter what else we believe beyond this, can agree are true.** > > **Everything else that we know, think we know, the inferences we make, the things we believe, etc. is debatable and has been debated. So without going outside the lines of the facts above, in any way, it is very hard to state honestly that only one conclusion is possible for reasonable, fair-minded people.** Steophan and those who see it as he does look at those facts and they add up to one thing that strikes them as extremely plain. I get that. But the fact is that enormous numbers of well-educated, reasonable, intelligent, fair-minded people look at those facts and see something JUST AS PLAIN that is extremely different. Steophan doesn’t get that. To him such people are… well, see the start of the post. As I’ve said… any attempt to engage under these circumstances is completely and utterly pointless. A worthwhile debate involves people who are capable of seeing beyond their own POV. Steophan can’t even accept that it exists… or rather that it exists in anyone that isn’t _ **therefore** _ a biased, ignorant moron for having such a view. If you can think of a way to engage someone coming from that POV, hat’s off. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/963 "2013-09-19T21:18:53Z")
Zimmerman = scumbag fully fulfillied. Martin = half-baked kid with a possible bright future ahead of him. Only thing we really know, the former’s prediction came true. ---
**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:** [September 19, 2013, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/964 "2013-09-19T21:49:29Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > But the fact is that enormous numbers of well-educated, reasonable, intelligent, fair-minded people look at those facts and see something JUST AS PLAIN that is extremely different. No, they do not. All the arguments for Zimmerman’s guilt that I’ve seen either require assuming facts not in evidence, or arguing that the law is other than it, in fact, is. The list of facts you provide, which I shall accept as correct for the sake of argument, do not prove Zimmerman guilty under Florida law. That is not opinion, it is observation and analysis. Likewise, it is my _observation_ that no-one has provided a satisfactory argument for guilt. It is my _opinion_ that no-one can. Should someone provide such an argument, both my observation and opinion will change. It’s really not complicated. Perhaps you should focus on providing such a satisfactory argument instead of berating me for not accepting unsatisfactory ones. This has nothing to do with my, or anyone’s, point of view. Facts, and the reasonable analysis thereof, are not a matter of opinion, but of observation and logic. And, of course, accepting unpalatable conclusions when they occur. Something I’ve had to do many times when I’ve been shown to be wrong. Can you point to any occasion where you’ve acknowledged that you’re wrong? I’ve never seen it. I believe you are projecting your own behaviour and attitudes on to me, and assuming that I am acting without reason because that’s how you act, and deep down you don’t actually understand reason at all. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2013, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/965 "2013-09-20T03:10:11Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, they do not. All the arguments for Zimmerman’s guilt that I’ve seen either require assuming facts not in evidence, or arguing that the law is other than it, in fact, is… Once again,you vividly affirm my point as soon as I make it…thanks for that, makes it simpler. ---
**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:** [September 20, 2013, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/966 "2013-09-20T11:12:55Z")
So, make an acceptable argument, then. I am not at fault for your failure to do so, or that of others. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2013, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/967 "2013-09-20T13:23:04Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No, it’s not correct. Why would I assume “likeliest” = “Beyond a reasonable doubt”? Beyond a reasonable doubt means exactly that: whatever doubts that may remain, if any, are not genuinely reasonable. Cheerfully withdrawn. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2013, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/968 "2013-09-20T17:45:23Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > So, make an acceptable argument, then. I am not at fault for your failure to do so, or that of others. If you were standing before me, I swear I’d pinch your cheek for being so adorable. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2013, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/969 "2013-09-22T13:16:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So what is more, **Brain Glutton**? You seemed to endorse, or at least post with approval, this claim that Dr. Bao was simply never asked this critical question. But he was. Comment? Well, BrainG? Vanished rather than comment? ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2013, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/970 "2013-09-22T15:47:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, BrainG? Vanished rather than comment? I hope you weren’t expecting anything different. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2013, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/971 "2013-09-22T18:11:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, BrainG? Vanished rather than comment? What do you expect. His post was a title and a link. Again. For all we know he was trying to make the same point you were. Without any substance to his post I’ll just assume that is the case. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2013, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028/972 "2013-09-27T18:09:24Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > What do you expect. His post was a title and a link. Again. For all we know he was trying to make the same point you were. Without any substance to his post I’ll just assume that is the case. A remarkably generous assumption, to be sure. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pitting-of-people-who-mistakenly-conflate-justice-with-legality-martin-zimmerman-related/664028.md?page=48)