It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:59 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PatGreen
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:22 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
whatever man, you must be the only one who's right. the other half of the country must be wrong. every time you gave an "example" it was either a made up story or something i refuted and you never addressed again.

i guess you are the legal expert. you twist words and phrases like newt gingrich. between the red herring and the straw man, i'm not sure what your favorite argument tactic is. this is it, i'm done with this thread.


Top
 Profile  
 
daz28
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:23 pm 
Offline
Star Sniper

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 3363
Jury that examines accusations against persons suspected of committing a crime and, if the evidence warrants it, issues formal charges on which the accused are later tried ( indictment). It does not decide guilt or innocence, only whether there is probable cause to believe that a person committed a crime

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/grand-jury#ixzz1qwawTBnM


Top
 Profile  
 
daz28
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:32 pm 
Offline
Star Sniper

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 3363
PatGreen wrote:
whatever man, you must be the only one who's right. the other half of the country must be wrong. every time you gave an "example" it was either a made up story or something i refuted and you never addressed again.

i guess you are the legal expert. you twist words and phrases like newt gingrich. between the red herring and the straw man, i'm not sure what your favorite argument tactic is. this is it, i'm done with this thread.

Well, I let the other posters decide how much I twisted words, and said your "example" were made up stories, and never addressed you points. I'm confident they won't see it that way at all. I tried to remain objective, and be informative, but the minute some INFORMS you, you feel threatened. Sounds like some kind of complex to me.(now I'm a "psychology expert", right?)

...and yes half the country watches Fox news with you, and the other half watches MSNBC. That doesn't mean either is "right". I like to analyze for myself, and create my own arguments.

My assertion: The guy is racist, and he should be put through the justice system, because this seems fishy.

You assertion: Everyone wants revenge, because now they got everyone believing hoodies are profiled. You can't prove he's guilty, so you can't arrest him, blah, blah./


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:43 pm 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
daz28 wrote:
My assertion: The guy is racist, and he should be put through the justice system, because this seems fishy.

You assertion: Everyone wants revenge, because now they got everyone believing hoodies are profiled. You can't prove he's guilty, so you can't arrest him, blah, blah./

close. i also think that he should be put through the justice system. my point is that there isn't the prerequisite of enough evidence for him to be arrested. has he fled? is he not cooperating? is there ANYTHING definitive that says "wow, zimmerman murdered that kid!"?

you are not remembering that i said i do not think that zimmerman acted correctly. i'm not saying he's innocent. i'm saying that i don't think there is enough evidence to do anything with, because (in my opinion) any defense lawyer will finish that case in a heartbeat and nothing could stick.


Top
 Profile  
 
daz28
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:03 am 
Offline
Star Sniper

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 3363
So you think that an expert saying he wasn't the one crying for help on the 911 tape isn't enough to get an arrest???????????? He could have been arrested on the spot for asserting he needed a gun to defend himself from a guy who Justin Bieber would destroy alone. It just doesn't make sense. An arrest is NOT hard to come by. Hell, if you've ever watched cops, they threaten EVERYONE with going to jail, and WILL take anyone downtown, especially if they seem to 'know their rights' They don't seem to worried about the "evidence' to do it. If a house is broken into, and they catch me walking down the street nearby, and I say something that doesn't add up in their opinion(thus making me suspicious), they can detain me.

I think you're the one who's not addressing my points. There is CLEARLY enough doubt to get an arrest. Would a grand jury send it to trial, I don't know, but I'd be happy if they got to look at the evidence. This trial would draw TONS of attention to the police department and their investigation, and that's why I don't want this left up to one prosecutor. Remember how we found out about how shitty the LAPD was in the OJ case? This prosecutor may be trying to avoid that, because it could be the end of his career.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:07 am 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
PatGreen wrote:
how the fuck do you know it's because he's black?

Because it's the most obvious starting point. It's the first thing you, I, or most any American would notice.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:10 am 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
I also know he (Zimmerman) called the cops and followed this guy around (against police instruction) then shot him based on his appearance. Any particular reason other than Martin was black that you think he did that?


Top
 Profile  
 
daz28
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:20 am 
Offline
Star Sniper

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 3363
Zimmerman reported to the dispatcher that he was "black, suspicious, and wearing a hoodie". He also made racist comments. I can't assure you there's a connection to the shooting, but the statements you made: "how do you know Zimmerman even knew he was black", or "how do you know he was racist" are just wrong.

Here's the part I don't get. Martin was doing nothing wrong, and if this guy didn't follow him(against recommendation) he'd still be alive and well. There has to be some negligence here. I mean, he HAD to be provoked in some manner. if this scrawny kid just attacked random people, and beat them to where they feared for their lives, it would have happened previously. This situation DOES reek of racism, and just because the media goes overboard with racism, it has people wanting to sweep it under the table as racial sensationalism. THAT is the saddest part, and people defending that position make it even grosser, imo.


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:00 am 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
NYIntensity wrote:
I think the OP's point is that we all assumed that Treyvon was some innocent 14 year old child, based on social media reports.

Turns out he's 17, and not quite the angel we thought. Here is where you all immediately jump to conclusions and scream "YEAH SO? HE DIDN'T DESERVE TO DIE!"

I agree with that. Zimmerman is in the wrong here unless Martin was actually attacking him, which there doesn't appear to be any evidence of.


My favorite part of all this has been Martin being portrayed as 'not an angel' because he was kicked out of school for _maybe_ having weed, yet when white folks make impassioned arguments about how weed should be legalized, nobody bats an eyelash.

Think about it.

Throw everything else out the window. Martin was walking on public roadways. Zimmerman was told not to follow or pursue, yet did so anyway. Zimmerman initiated the conflict, which should instantly invalidate any semblance of a self-defense claim.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:10 am 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
Squanto wrote:
Throw everything else out the window. Martin was walking on public roadways. Zimmerman was told not to follow or pursue, yet did so anyway. Zimmerman initiated the conflict, which should instantly invalidate any semblance of a self-defense claim.

okay. i've said it previously, but i'll say it again. i agree that zimmerman was wrong, and the way you have put it here is awesome.

however, he was told not to pursue by a 911 operator, correct? they aren't law enforcement in any sense. can it be said that if martin was allowed to walk on public roadways AND that zimmerman didn't have the right to approach him? doesn't it STILL come down to who attacked who first? or is there (i can't remember the term right now) prior cases that use the same logic?


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:22 am 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
PatGreen wrote:
Squanto wrote:
Throw everything else out the window. Martin was walking on public roadways. Zimmerman was told not to follow or pursue, yet did so anyway. Zimmerman initiated the conflict, which should instantly invalidate any semblance of a self-defense claim.

okay. i've said it previously, but i'll say it again. i agree that zimmerman was wrong, and the way you have put it here is awesome.

however, he was told not to pursue by a 911 operator, correct? they aren't law enforcement in any sense. can it be said that if martin was allowed to walk on public roadways AND that zimmerman didn't have the right to approach him? doesn't it STILL come down to who attacked who first? or is there (i can't remember the term right now) prior cases that use the same logic?


This is why the 'Stand Your Ground' law is terrible. It doesn't matter who swung first; it's all about who FELT threatened first. Consider both angles.

- Martin is walking down the road, sees this large man (Zimmerman) following him. When Zimmerman gets out of the car and pursues him, Martin is legally justified under SYG to use deadly force to protect himself.

- Zimmerman confronts Martin about what he's doing there, and Martin attacks. Zimmerman is legally justified under SYG to use deadly force to protect himself from Martin's attack.

See the problem?

In my mind, this is more clear cut because Zimmerman was specifically told NOT to initiate contact with Martin, but did so anyway. Zimmerman created the situation, and should be held accountable for it. By any normal reading of the SYG law in Florida, I could go talk smack to a gang, and if they turned to come after me, I could gun them all down legally.

It's sick.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:31 am 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
Squanto wrote:
This is why the 'Stand Your Ground' law is terrible. It doesn't matter who swung first; it's all about who FELT threatened first. Consider both angles.

- Martin is walking down the road, sees this large man (Zimmerman) following him. When Zimmerman gets out of the car and pursues him, Martin is legally justified under SYG to use deadly force to protect himself.

- Zimmerman confronts Martin about what he's doing there, and Martin attacks. Zimmerman is legally justified under SYG to use deadly force to protect himself from Martin's attack.

See the problem?

In my mind, this is more clear cut because Zimmerman was specifically told NOT to initiate contact with Martin, but did so anyway. Zimmerman created the situation, and should be held accountable for it. By any normal reading of the SYG law in Florida, I could go talk smack to a gang, and if they turned to come after me, I could gun them all down legally.

It's sick.

it is, but i can see why it would have been passed. i think it's a shame that laws like this even have to be passed. 50 years ago this wouldn't have been a blink in the eye. but i don't feel like you answered my question at all, unless you're saying you don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
Displaced Fan
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:33 am 
Offline
Superstar Goalie
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 1:34 am
Posts: 4097
One thing people aren't stopping to understand is that what we know comes from shitty "news" networks. There are trained professionals of all races working on this case who want justice. I hardly think that a couple people arguing on a hockey site with no access to the case files and evidence know better than them. If the evidence is there for a trial they will press charges and go through the steps. If there isn't enough evidence then they will be forced to swallow their suspicions. Do guilty people get away? Yes, it sucks. Would I rather live in a country that requires hard facts to prosecute people rather than lynch mod "justice"? Yes.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:49 am 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
Displaced Fan wrote:
One thing people aren't stopping to understand is that what we know comes from shitty "news" networks. There are trained professionals of all races working on this case who want justice. I hardly think that a couple people arguing on a hockey site with no access to the case files and evidence know better than them. If the evidence is there for a trial they will press charges and go through the steps. If there isn't enough evidence then they will be forced to swallow their suspicions. Do guilty people get away? Yes, it sucks. Would I rather live in a country that requires hard facts to prosecute people rather than lynch mod "justice"? Yes.

thank you for being much more eloquent and concise than I apparently can be in this situation.


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:54 am 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
I'll try again. My answers to your questions, as best I can, bolded.

PatGreen wrote:
however, he was told not to pursue by a 911 operator, correct?

That is correct. Transcript of Zimmerman's 911 call here : http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... erman.html

they aren't law enforcement in any sense.

Yes and no. They may be civilian dispatchers, might be actual officers. Depends on the department.

can it be said that if martin was allowed to walk on public roadways AND that zimmerman didn't have the right to approach him?

Not sure how to answer this really. Martin is clearly allowed to be on a public sidewalk, and Zimmerman is clearly allowed to drive in the area as well. I'd say Zimmerman had the right to approach Martin generally, but based on the 911 transcript I'd question his mindset when he did so.


doesn't it STILL come down to who attacked who first? or is there (i can't remember the term right now) prior cases that use the same logic?

As I mentioned above, it's not who attacked who first. It's possible that Martin felt threatened by Zimmerman's advances, and decided to defend himself. At that point, Zimmerman can say he felt threatened by Martin attacking him, and decided to defend himself.

That's the problem with these poorly worded laws. Self defense laws should shield someone from defending themselves from an aggressor. They should not provide a loophole for an aggressor to initiate hostilities, then claim self defense when someone chooses to defend themselves.



Top
 Profile  
 
Sabresfansince1980
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:05 am 
Offline
Star Sniper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:45 pm
Posts: 3021
Location: So far away
The point of this thread was not to dissect the Zimmerman/Martin case, because it would take too much time and too many posts to explain law and police procedure, correct peoples' misunderstandings of each, and people would still cling to those misunderstandings anyway.

The point was to discuss the now circular effect of poor media reporting that fuels public ignorance, and the ease that social media allows people to perpetuate mis-information. Yankee is right that people have always been this way, but social media has brougth a generation of reporters that grew up using social media with no regard to fact checking. They can spread inaccuracies and average people can spread those inaccuracies even faster now. This thread, with the many inaccuracies and opinions formed from a lack of knowledge and understanding, is now a great example of what I was getting at.


Top
 Profile  
 
PatGreen
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:28 am 
Offline
PP Quarterback

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:55 pm
Posts: 1836
educate us. briefly, if necessary. i value an expert's opinion and input because i learn volumes from it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Squanto
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:36 am 
Offline
Carlos Spicy-Wiener
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:31 am
Posts: 9240
Location: FAP TURBO
To the social media point, it's not specifically the fault of social media, it's a function of the ease of use of technology. Falsehoods and innuendos were still spread on the early internet on BBSes and chat rooms. Today, it takes someone 5 minutes to setup a blog and start spewing garbage. 10 years ago it would have taken 5 days. Twitter wouldn't have been anything 10 years ago before smartphones. Now, someone can type 'poop' in a tweet sent from India, and a phone can buzz in a high school kid's pocket in Peoria.

With such connectivity comes downsides, and the propagation of falsehoods is a big one. It's not going away, as much as I'd like it to myself, so as a society we need to adapt to it. People need to re-learn critical thinking and evaluation.

Personally, I just simple ignore people, reporters included, who don't bother to check sources, who go for 'FIRST!!' over being right. That's the price they pay for abusing the medium the way they do.


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:04 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Well in this case it appears social media allows some people to do the internet equivalent of shaking up the ant farm and watching the results from the outside.

1980, I still don't get your motives. George Zimmerman was the only name you mentioned besides the Duke Lacrosse team in the OP. So don't expect us to think that this isn't somehow about the Martin case. Furthermore you can see just how emotional a case it is across the country. If you think that Zimmerman has been unfairly implicated, then say so and say why you think it like the rest of us. Otherwise, don't bring up a hot-button issue, then sit in judgement of people's responses.


Top
 Profile  
 
sabresindc
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:47 pm 
Offline
Captain Clutch
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:58 pm
Posts: 6146
Location: Southern most point of Northern Virginia
daz28 wrote:
An arrest is NOT hard to come by. Hell, if you've ever watched cops, they threaten EVERYONE with going to jail, and WILL take anyone downtown, especially if they seem to 'know their rights' They don't seem to worried about the "evidence' to do it. If a house is broken into, and they catch me walking down the street nearby, and I say something that doesn't add up in their opinion(thus making me suspicious), they can detain me.

SERIOUSLY!!!!! This is pure idiotic thinking or you have some serious issues with law enforcement. Cops HAVE TO HAVE PROBABLY CAUSE TO MAKE AN ARREST.... Lets now define PROBABLY CAUSE shall we - A reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. The test the court of appeals employs to determine whether probable cause existed for purposes of arrest is whether facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. If they are detaining you then that is slightly different story. That's call resonable suspicion....an objectively justifiable suspicion that is based on specific facts or circumstances and that justifies stopping and sometimes searching (as by frisking) a person thought to be involved in criminal activity at the time. Zimmerman was detained. Thats why he was transported to the station in handcuffs...

This basically says that the facts and circumstances surrounding the investigation would be enough for a resonable person (not another cop but a citizen) to come to the same belief. So, just that definition alone screams that cops cannot make arrests just for the fuck of it.

I'm not saying that there isn't enough to charge Zimmerman with a crime. I don't know.... no one is privy to all the facts, evidence, or crime scene photos....etc. Just the act alone (in most states, EXECEPT FLORIDA) would be enough probable cause. Funny thing is, Florida has a "stand your ground" law. Which means if someone attacks you, and you reasonable believe (funny how that word comes up again) that your life is in danger then you can use deadly force WITHOUT attempting to flee. THAT is most likely why the PROSECUTOR didn't charge him with a crime.

Also, I love how all these people see a surveillence video of him walking through a police station and can tell he wasn't injured. This was after a certain amount of time had lapsed and after the fire department had treated him so there would not be bleeding by this time.

Personally, I think Zimmerman is manipulating the Florida Castle Doctrine to try and get away with murder. he's a squirrel wanna be who used this neighborhood patrol to play cop. Either way, Zimmerman was completely in his right to call the police and ask the he be checked out. Trayvon wasnt suppose to be there in the first place. Especially since there has been reports that this gated community had a rash of burglaries recently.

Sorry for the rant....not trying to offend anyone

_________________
sabretoothpick wrote:
Yhoshi wrote:
wollt ihr die sabres oben sehen müsst ihr die tabelle drehn.

It's a phrase that basically means, if you wanna see the Sabres at the top, turn the rankings.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron