Don't go trying to buy Skittles if you're black in Florida ...

[Breed]

Simply put, the fact that this idiot decided to leave the vehicle and pursue the victim makes the claim of self-defence invalid.

I agree. Particularly since he directly disobeyed a police dispatchers instruction to do exactly that.

[PC Load Letter]

Zimmerman is Hispanic.

[DutchBird]

Zimmerman is Hispanic.

What do you base that claim on?

[PopeyeJones]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...f=black-voices

At an emergency homeowner’s association meeting on March 1, “one man was escorted out because he openly expressed his frustration because he had previously contacted the Sanford Police Department about Zimmerman approaching him and even coming to his home,” the resident wrote in an email to HuffPost. “It was also made known that there had been several complaints about George Zimmerman and his tactics" in his neighborhood watch captain role.

[PopeyeJones]

What do you base that claim on?

Comments from his father, today.

[PC Load Letter]

What do you base that claim on?

A quick google search.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...,6480603.story

[Marley]

Simply put, the fact that this idiot decided to leave the vehicle and pursue the victim makes the claim of self-defence invalid.

Maybe, maybe not. That's the point of contention with respect to this particular law. Zimmerman was an idiot that intentionally put himself in a position that he believed necessitated lethal force. It should make self-defense invalid but it's possible the law could be interpreted in such a way that Zimmerman is not charged. Hopefully the DA does the reasonable thing and charges Zimmerman.

[Marley]

The reason could be as simple as that, and no, that kind of argument is not necessarily that farfetched - especially when looking at the gender aspect of perpetrator/victim in relation to police/prosecution/judge/jury response...

An equally simple and banal option: police laziness. Or perhaps a combination of the two - police wants to take it easy, and the fact that the kid was black is only an added incentive to put as little effort in it as possible. Again a fairly common reason for wrongful convictions (police laziness - find the nearest person we can blame the crime on, and get him convicted). Same process, only in this case, the decision is to not solve the crime.

Sure, it's possible. It just seems unlikely that multiple cops would risk careers by trying to intentionally sway eye witness testimony for some neighborhood watch guy. Not like Zimmerman is a brother in blue.

[Hyped]

Zimmerman sounds like one of those cop-wanna-be types. Probably did not even make mall cop.

This sums it up for me.

Why is this man not even in jail? I have no tolerance for rent-a-cop types who let the power go to their heads....

[nywis]

This is the crap that drives me crazy:

“In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don’t have the grounds to arrest him.”

one guy had a gun the other didn't , lethal force is only allowed to be used when you feel your life is in danger. how the hell was this kid, even if he was on top of Zimmerman, putting his life in danger?

this guy is going to need to police protection if sharpton and his ilk go down to FL to start protesting.

[PopeyeJones]

Sure, it's possible. It just seems unlikely that multiple cops would risk careers by trying to intentionally sway eye witness testimony for some neighborhood watch guy. Not like Zimmerman is a brother in blue.

Agreed that intent sounds unlikely. It sounds like the officers were just breaking protocol and may be poorly trained.

What's more reasonable is that the cop got Zimmerman's testimony that he yelled for help, and then when he questioned the woman he accepted that as fact and asked for a clarification or correction on her statement, which is a mistake.

The dirty underbelly of that reasonable scenario is why they would implicitly accept Zimmerman's testimony as fact.

[AndromedaPatFan]

Yep, it also kicks what APF said in the thread, which is this.....



.....all up in its ass as well.

Not sure what you mean or think I meant, but we're on the same side of this one.

It's generally my position that racism is a lot less bad than it used to be, but also a lot worse than it both should and some day will be.

[PopeyeJones]

It's generally my position that racism is a lot less bad than it used to be, but also a lot worse than it both should and some day will be.

Read more: http://forums.kffl.com/newreply.php?...#ixzz1pFFUULn2

Kinda depends on what you're talking about IMO, and if by "racism" you mean overt racism or just racial inequality (e.g. wealth inequality between white families and black families more than quadrupled between 1985 and 2010 -- white families (115K) now have on average about 23 times as much wealth as black families (5K)). Black wealth has decreased by 60% from where it was in 2004, whereas white wealth has declined by about 10%).

As far as "racism" I think it's hard to tell, but as far as racial inequality goes, I'd strongly disagree with the narrative about how -- as a rule -- things are getting better (see: wealth, income, unemployment, imprisonment and over-policing, access to social services, etc.).

[Marley]

Agreed that intent sounds unlikely. It sounds like the officers were just breaking protocol and may be poorly trained.

What's more reasonable is that the cop got Zimmerman's testimony that he yelled for help, and then when he questioned the woman he accepted that as fact and asked for a clarification or correction on her statement, which is a mistake.

The dirty underbelly of that reasonable scenario is why they would implicitly accept Zimmerman's testimony as fact.

One of the things that doesn't sit right wit me is that the a narcotics cop started the interrogation. This wasn't some rookie that didn't know procedure. And you're spot on about the ease they had with accepting Zimmerman's testimony at face value. Very odd, but if I had to venture a guess, I would think that the police believe they need rock solid evidence that the shooting and subsequent death fell outside the intent of that law. Seems fairly reasonable that they punted t to the DA to make the call because they're unsure.

[eaglesnut]

Sure, it's possible. It just seems unlikely that multiple cops would risk careers by trying to intentionally sway eye witness testimony for some neighborhood watch guy. Not like Zimmerman is a brother in blue.

Unfortunately it's not a risk to their careers. It's an acquired skill in the industry.