evilneko:

ravenshrike:
Aaaand a FUN new development.

After the first CNN enhancement in which they pushed coons without ever pushing coons, it appears they are now pushing COLD.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/cnn-enhances-zimmerman-911-call-again-and-reporter-now-doubts-racial-slur-used/

I'm still waiting for someone besides me to come and say "He said CUNTS!"

The audio's just too unclear to make out what he said. I kinda doubt it was "cold" even in late February. Especially considering Zimmerman's from...er...one of the Carolinas. But hey, Wunderground is an awesome site, let's see if I can find what the temperature was. Between 6-8pm, it was around 63 degrees with some very light rain (most likely just sprinkles, at most) and a light breeze.

Nah, it's not cold. At least not "fucking" cold anyway.

It's "cunts" I tells ya.

As for injuries, we only have Zimmerman and the police report (and I do view the report, and the entire SPD, with suspicion, based on how they've utterly mishandled the case). An ambulance for Zimmerman was canceled, showing his injuries to be very minor. I am highly skeptical of the broken nose. That would be rather painful, and I doubt Zimmerman would have gone along with calling off the ambulance. Adrenaline only lasts so long.

Do they have medical records? Don't know, his lawyer sure isn't saying. In an interview with Piers Morgan all he said was "We'll present all the evidence at trial."

Well I sure hope they do. I hope there's a lot more than what we've seen because if not, I'd expect a hung jury, which is probably the worst possible outcome for everyone involved.

why would an American use the term cunts?

Volf:
why would an American use the term cunts?

Why wouldn't one? You think we don't say it here? Whatever gave you that idea?

farson135:
So the police report says it but you categorically deny it.

Strawman.

I said 'looks', as in 'my observation'. 'My observation' has no bearing on the police report.

farson135:
Wet probably would not show up.

Yet the officer noticed it in the dark.

Also the officer appears, due to his report, to not think the wetness on Zimmerman's back was caused by the rain (and does not mention any of Martin's blood on Zimmerman).

This suggests that Zimmerman was very wet.

farson135:
Can I see any blood on a red and black jacket? What do you think? Aren't you an LEO?

You say the water had time to dry on Zimmerman's jacket?

But not the blood?

Because dried blood is not the same colour as Zimmerman's bright red jacket.

farson135:
Never come to my home or even try to make contact with my family. I do not take such promises lightly and trust that any attack on my family, my friends, or me will not earn you a right to moderation from me. That is a promise.

Touched a nerve? You act like you have something to hide from the law.

http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-Fire/2012/04/03/Man-78-recounts-assault-by-6-youths-in-E-Toledo.html

Not sure how relevant or how true, but I thought this was notable enough to be worthy of mention. A 78 year old man was beaten and robbed by several youths, who (according to the man) saying things to the effect "this is for Trayvon." Can't be sure if this guy is lying, if he is trying to get his case more noticed.

TechNoFear:
Yet the officer noticed it in the dark.

Human eyes will continue to beat human eyes looking at a recorded image.

This suggests that Zimmerman was very wet.

Or he was wearing a water resistant jacket.

You say the water had time to dry on Zimmerman's jacket?

Or is came off.

Because dried blood is not the same colour as Zimmerman's bright red jacket.

To a video camera yes it would be.

Touched a nerve? You act like you have something to hide from the law.

You are not the law. You are just a kid with little experience in the outside world.

evilneko:

Volf:
why would an American use the term cunts?

Why wouldn't one? You think we don't say it here? Whatever gave you that idea?

Um, I'm assuming you don't know, but I'm also American and the only, only time I've heard it was when it was used to insult women or it was said be a person who was in touch with English culture/media. I hesitate on calling Florida "the South", but especially in the South I have never heard someone say it without intending to insult women.

farson135:
[snip]

You have come to the point in our discussions when you can no longer present a credible counter argument (and just resort to verbal diarrhea).

Not as long as usual, or am I just getting to know how your mind works?

Not G. Ivingname:
http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-Fire/2012/04/03/Man-78-recounts-assault-by-6-youths-in-E-Toledo.html

Not sure how relevant or how true, but I thought this was notable enough to be worthy of mention. A 78 year old man was beaten and robbed by several youths, who (according to the man) saying things to the effect "this is for Trayvon." Can't be sure if this guy is lying, if he is trying to get his case more noticed.

Really? The disease of old age isn't bad enough on its own?

So now we have people being assaulted and threatened with death in a blatant hate crime for revenge of an incident that is falsely called a hate crime...

TechNoFear:

You have come to the point in our discussions when you can no longer present a credible counter argument (and just resort to verbal diarrhea).

Not as long as usual, or am I just getting to know how your mind works?

So, you have no abiliy to counter what I said so you are trying to bow out without humilating yourself. Ok. You have added nothing to this debate so you can go. At least Blablahb added a bit of color to the debate.

farson135:

TechNoFear:

You have come to the point in our discussions when you can no longer present a credible counter argument (and just resort to verbal diarrhea).

Not as long as usual, or am I just getting to know how your mind works?

So, you have no abiliy to counter what I said so you are trying to bow out without humilating yourself. Ok. You have added nothing to this debate so you can go. At least Blablahb added a bit of color to the debate.

Rational discussion and TechNoFear are inimical to each others' existence. Attempting to engage him in the former never works. Ever.

Zekksta:

Seekster:
I just want to say that the media coverage of this has been disgraceful for the most part. As journalists we are called to report the truth and minimize harm, both of these principles have been violated by numerous media sources.

Are you a journalist?

I agree 100%. It's pretty disgusting to warp stories and twist facts to fit an agenda, regardless of what the agenda is.

I have a degree in Journalism (and in History) yes but I am not currently practicing my profession. I am about a year out of college working an entry level position for a National Media company subsidiary.

Personally I think its an outrage someone hasnt been fired at NBC (or maybe they have and it just wasnt made public). Seriously even at best what they did with the 911 tape was negligent at bet and actual malice at worst. It goes against all kinds of journalism ethics.

Seekster:

Zekksta:

Seekster:
I just want to say that the media coverage of this has been disgraceful for the most part. As journalists we are called to report the truth and minimize harm, both of these principles have been violated by numerous media sources.

Are you a journalist?

I agree 100%. It's pretty disgusting to warp stories and twist facts to fit an agenda, regardless of what the agenda is.

I have a degree in Journalism (and in History) yes but I am not currently practicing my profession. I am about a year out of college working an entry level position for a National Media company subsidiary.

Personally I think its an outrage someone hasnt been fired at NBC (or maybe they have and it just wasnt made public). Seriously even at best what they did with the 911 tape was negligent at bet and actual malice at worst. It goes against all kinds of journalism ethics.

Would you say that the media has practiced Yellow Journalism in regards to this case?

Seekster:

Zekksta:

Seekster:
I just want to say that the media coverage of this has been disgraceful for the most part. As journalists we are called to report the truth and minimize harm, both of these principles have been violated by numerous media sources.

Are you a journalist?

I agree 100%. It's pretty disgusting to warp stories and twist facts to fit an agenda, regardless of what the agenda is.

I have a degree in Journalism (and in History) yes but I am not currently practicing my profession. I am about a year out of college working an entry level position for a National Media company subsidiary.

Personally I think its an outrage someone hasnt been fired at NBC (or maybe they have and it just wasnt made public). Seriously even at best what they did with the 911 tape was negligent at bet and actual malice at worst. It goes against all kinds of journalism ethics.

The incredibly frightening part is, even after they did come out publicly and say they edited it, a whole lot of people are still going to regard the edited tapes as fact...

new proof that the main stream media (Fox, CNN, MSNBC) manipulates things for better ratings

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/trayvon-martin-shooter-zimmermans-911-audio-tapes/

according to the tapes, Zimmermam didn't refer to Trayvon's race until after the police asked and said he "didn't want to pursue", but the cops were reluctant to do anything.

Maybe the cops should take all the blame, maybe this is why they let Zimmerman off so easy.
maybe people should stop believing everything the media says as truth -_-

Also, in possibly bigger news, the UN aparently wants a peice of the Trayvon action
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9189884/Trayvon-Martin-killing-UN-human-rights-chief-calls-for-investigation.html

I say for the UN to mind it's own buisness, it'll only muck things up.

Volf:

Seekster:

Zekksta:

Are you a journalist?

I agree 100%. It's pretty disgusting to warp stories and twist facts to fit an agenda, regardless of what the agenda is.

I have a degree in Journalism (and in History) yes but I am not currently practicing my profession. I am about a year out of college working an entry level position for a National Media company subsidiary.

Personally I think its an outrage someone hasnt been fired at NBC (or maybe they have and it just wasnt made public). Seriously even at best what they did with the 911 tape was negligent at bet and actual malice at worst. It goes against all kinds of journalism ethics.

Would you say that the media has practiced Yellow Journalism in regards to this case?

Depends on how you define "yellow journalism" as that phrase gets thrown around a lot. Personally though, I wouldnt even call the media coverage of the Trayvon Martin case to be journalism of any kind. Its rabble rousing is what it is.

Hammartroll:
new proof that the main stream media (Fox, CNN, MSNBC) manipulates things for better ratings

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/trayvon-martin-shooter-zimmermans-911-audio-tapes/

according to the tapes, Zimmermam didn't refer to Trayvon's race until after the police asked and said he "didn't want to pursue", but the cops were reluctant to do anything.

Maybe the cops should take all the blame, maybe this is why they let Zimmerman off so easy.
maybe people should stop believing everything the media says as truth -_-

Also, in possibly bigger news, the UN aparently wants a peice of the Trayvon action
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9189884/Trayvon-Martin-killing-UN-human-rights-chief-calls-for-investigation.html

I say for the UN to mind it's own buisness, it'll only muck things up.

To late for that, for some reason everybody sees this case as "proof positive" of their position. Anti-gun see a man getting away with murder by hiding behind self defense. Pro-gun see a man holding off attack in self defense. Racists (black and white) see this as a horrible attack on one of their own.

It all it is just the spark that is exploding many tensions between the left and right, with the facts being lost in the name of publicity and politics.

Hammartroll:
Also, in possibly bigger news, the UN aparently wants a peice of the Trayvon action
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9189884/Trayvon-Martin-killing-UN-human-rights-chief-calls-for-investigation.html

I say for the UN to mind it's own buisness, it'll only muck things up.

Oh God, as if the Shit Storm couldn't get any bigger.

Not G. Ivingname:

Hammartroll:
new proof that the main stream media (Fox, CNN, MSNBC) manipulates things for better ratings

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/trayvon-martin-shooter-zimmermans-911-audio-tapes/

according to the tapes, Zimmermam didn't refer to Trayvon's race until after the police asked and said he "didn't want to pursue", but the cops were reluctant to do anything.

Maybe the cops should take all the blame, maybe this is why they let Zimmerman off so easy.
maybe people should stop believing everything the media says as truth -_-

Also, in possibly bigger news, the UN aparently wants a peice of the Trayvon action
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9189884/Trayvon-Martin-killing-UN-human-rights-chief-calls-for-investigation.html

I say for the UN to mind it's own buisness, it'll only muck things up.

To late for that, for some reason everybody sees this case as "proof positive" of their position. Anti-gun see a man getting away with murder by hiding behind self defense. Pro-gun see a man holding off attack in self defense. Racists (black and white) see this as a horrible attack on one of their own.

The majority of pro gun people think he was a fucking moron for following, but we refuse to let people railroad both the conversation over the incident and Zimmerman himself. Most of us think that in order for him to be arrested and jailed they should damn well have some sort of evidence that he STARTED the altercation when all signs point to Martin coming back after Zimmerman lost him and initiating conversation. Then the extent of anyone's knowledge except Zimmerman's stops. Zimmerman's story has been consistent with the only eyewitness to part of the altercation and without evidence that he's lying he will walk. Or would have before the brouhaha. Given all the attention this has received the probability that he will get a fair trial that results in anything but a hung jury is damned close to nil.

Not G. Ivingname:
To late for that, for some reason everybody sees this case as "proof positive" of their position. Anti-gun see a man getting away with murder by hiding behind self defense. Pro-gun see a man holding off attack in self defense. Racists (black and white) see this as a horrible attack on one of their own.

It all it is just the spark that is exploding many tensions between the left and right, with the facts being lost in the name of publicity and politics.

Might want to be a little more careful in those base clasifications. Personally I see a classic example of a break down in basic self defense practice and reason. Both Martin and Zimmerman seemed to have royally screwed up.

farson135:

Not G. Ivingname:
To late for that, for some reason everybody sees this case as "proof positive" of their position. Anti-gun see a man getting away with murder by hiding behind self defense. Pro-gun see a man holding off attack in self defense. Racists (black and white) see this as a horrible attack on one of their own.

It all it is just the spark that is exploding many tensions between the left and right, with the facts being lost in the name of publicity and politics.

Might want to be a little more careful in those base clasifications. Personally I see a classic example of a break down in basic self defense practice and reason. Both Martin and Zimmerman seemed to have royally screwed up.

Fair point, and since you seam like much more of an expert than me in terms of firearms and self defense, I will defer to your opinion.

Xanthious:
snip snap

Couldn't have said it better myself(in regards to Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson).

Case in point, why hasn't there been more coverage or support from Mr. Sharpton and Mr.Jackson for Jennifer Hudson and the murder of her family members?

So with nothing new the past week or so, and probably nothing until Tuesday (grand jury day), I was curious about a couple things:

What was your first impression of the case, the first time you heard about it? Have you changed your mind since? If so, why?

I was actually less skeptical of Zimmerman's self-defense claim early on.

evilneko:
What was your first impression of the case, the first time you heard about it? Have you changed your mind since? If so, why?

Didn't give a fuck.
Then people started getting butthurt and blowing it up all over Facebook.
Did my research, decided to be Pro-Zimmerman.
People got even MORE butthurt, and started calling me "Racis' cracka'."
Went back to not giving a fuck.

Now I'm just sitting back and watching the world burn from my lawn chair... Waiting for the inevitable riots when people don't get the results they want...
^{I have popcorn if anyone wants some.}

farson135:
Not that serious. Anyway it has already been showed on this forum but here it is again-

Then out goes the argumentation that he was lethally threatened. He can't have his cake and eat it, too.

You can watch the enhanced video here- http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/03/enhanced-video-zimmerman-in-police-station-appears-to-show-injuries/

Thanks for the video. But why is there no gash visible on the supposedly sharpened video outside of the freeze frame they chose to display (bottom right corner)? Consider me still skeptical. Maybe they messed up the side-by-side videos, though the one on the right does look to be of a higher resolution.

When is the first hearing going to be? Tuesday? I'm really looking forward to an official statement on these many different claims and aspects of the event.

Then it still have nothing to do with SYG because it is not self defense.

Of course it could be then, because if you disregard his claim, he could easily have been the aggressor. That's the problem with basing this almost solely on his testimony.

Because aside from speculation that is all we have.

How is that a valid argumentation? If somebody actually murders somebody else and there are no witnesses, why would we take the murderer's account as correct? Note this is not regarding Zimmerman in particular here but rather the general approach. It's a nonsensical approach and I think you only take it because you already think Zimmerman is trustworthy/innocent.

Sure I could go under the assumption that Blablahb is right and Zimmerman just pulled a gun and shot him for no reason or I could go with the stories we do have.

How about "go with neither" at this point?

Hell, if Zimmerman pulled his gun at first it seems odd that one or the other would have been screaming for help as if being beaten.

Well, if we create some more conjecture: Maybe he pulled his gun out, waved it in Martin's face and made threats towards him. Martin panicked and started screaming. Zimmerman shot and shut off the screams.
That's a plausible scenario.

Not if it is shallow enough. Mine was and they just put a bandage around it.

Didn't see a bandage, either, plus this again would contradict the claims that this was a life-or-death situation warranting deadly force.

Skeleon:
Then out goes the argumentation that he was lethally threatened. He can't have his cake and eat it, too.

Any attack to the head is potentially lethal. I have told my students (yes I have literally said this) that if your head is hitting concrete or anything else you are losing brain function by the second. You must react immediately to stop the threat to your person. Then I showed them various ways to detach themselves without using a gun because you DO NOT use a gun at extreme close ranges.

The fact is that ANY MAJOR attack to the head is dangerous and must be considered potential lethal force especially when you are on the ground and someone is on top of you. As you lose mental function you lose the ability to react appropriately. So, if the situation escalates you are totally at the attacker's mercy. That is not a position you want to be in. Of course that is under the assumption that that attack is not enough to kill you on the spot and yes, escalation is very possible in hand to hand combat.

Thanks for the video. But why is there no gash visible on the supposedly sharpened video outside of the freeze frame they chose to display (bottom right corner)? Consider me still skeptical. Maybe they messed up the side-by-side videos, though the one on the right does look to be of a higher resolution.

I think they messed it up. Once again it seems like an odd lie to make especially from his lawyer. The court of public opinion is not going to help him in this case.

When is the first hearing going to be? Tuesday? I'm really looking forward to an official statement on these many different claims and aspects of the event.

I am as well.

Of course it could be then, because if you disregard his claim, he could easily have been the aggressor. That's the problem with basing this almost solely on his testimony.

Him being the aggressor does not seem to match with his, the girlfriends, or the polices statement.

How is that a valid argumentation? If somebody actually murders somebody else and there are no witnesses, why would we take the murderer's account as correct? Note this is not regarding Zimmerman in particular here but rather the general approach. It's a nonsensical approach and I think you only take it because you already think Zimmerman is trustworthy/innocent.

No actually. If we are going to speculate at all on his innocence or guilt (which is what this entire debate is about) then we only have those stories. I don't trust Zimmerman. I have stated several times that he fucked up royally and I WILL be using this case as an example of how NOT to do it.

How about "go with neither" at this point?

We are speculating on what actually happened. We can go with pure speculation or we can go off of available evidence. I am going off available evidence from both Zimmerman, the girlfriend, and the police. I have neither convicted or exonerated Zimmerman. I will leave that bullshit the Blablahb. I am simply using my experience to tell what I see.

Well, if we create some more conjecture: Maybe he pulled his gun out, waved it in Martin's face and made threats towards him. Martin panicked and started screaming. Zimmerman shot and shut off the screams.

That's a plausible scenario.

Not really. I thought about that earlier (I actually posted that scenario earlier on this topic) but it does not mesh with the girlfriends statement. If she is telling the truth that would mean that Zimmerman did not have his gun in any sort of ready position (maybe by his side) when he approached Martin (either that or Martin is unbelievably dense). If Zimmerman then brought his gun up and Martin went for it, they would have been struggling for it and maybe fell down (which would match the GF's story) BUT the conversation does not imply the draw. The girlfriend said that the order of events was Martin asked, Zimmerman asked, struggle. That is an odd order of events. The screaming and calling for help would imply that the immediate struggle has ended and it is one side attacking the other.

Now, I may be biased because I am actually trained in self defense but the order of events seems to imply that Zimmerman's gun was holstered. It does not seem to make any sense for Zimmerman to have drawn that early especially given the 911 call and on.

Didn't see a bandage, either

I was in a high dust/dirt environment and needed some sort of wrap, he was in rather clean conditions.

Blablahb:
this looks a ton like Zimmerman is some NRA freak

Got any proof? More paranoia. Maybe we should arrest you before you go crazy and attack someone.

who's read too much fearmongering propaganda and then reasons that any black guy in his neighbourhood must always be a criminal, and that lead him to chase after and murder Martin.

Got any proof that he did it because the kid was black?

Even if one may not be able to prove the murderer Zimmerman literally thought "He's black, so let's kill him", it more than likely plays a role, because the scaremongering that could spawn people who think that is quite real. Why in the hell would anyone think that a kid walking through his neighbourhood is a threat? Because of scaremongering that involves a lot of race stuff, even if just stereotypes.

Actually it is quite common in gated communities for people to call the police when some random person is walking around after dark. A friend of mine lives in one and I had a cop asking me what I was doing there and he even followed me to my friends house where he confirmed why I was there.

Actually, the NRA pro-violence lobby that came to defend the murderer shows this is the case by their low attempt to villify Martin as some gangsta rap influenced kid, behind which their implicit argument is "Because anyone who is black and follows this culture must always be a criminal", thank you for showing your true face gun lobby.

Actually the NRA has said nothing directly about the case. Once again I went to the NRA-ILA website and looked up Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. The only thing I got back was this article from the Washington Times- http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/apr/2/debunking-the-stand-your-ground-myth/

http://www.nraila.org/search.aspx?s=george zimmerman

Sharpton and Jackson campaign against such scaremongering, so it makes sense for them to pick up this case, but not the other.

Escalating the situation and increasing tension is not helping anything.

Blablahb:

Sharpton and Jackson campaign against such scaremongering, so it makes sense for them to pick up this case, but not the other.

The point is that whenever its a white on black crime, their there. However they don't give black-on-black crime the same time and effort.

Blab, your inflammatory language isn't really helping. I don't buy Zimmerman's story either but I'm not ready to outright call him a murderer.

Anyway, thought I'd add this: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-07/business/sns-rt-usa-floridashooting-nbcl2e8f710w-20120407_1_nbc-news-nbc-universal-sources

NBC fired a producer over the edited 911 tape thing.

NBC news has now commented on the "mistake" they made...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/08/nbc-news-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-error_n_1410913.html

Volf:
NBC news has now commented on the "mistake" they made...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/08/nbc-news-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-error_n_1410913.html

NBC is just another ethically bankrupt media company like most of the mainstream media is nowadays. Whether they were willfully or accidentally negligent in this doesnt change the fact that they were negligent.

As for scum like Al Sharpton, I have nothing nice to say about the man so I wont say anything more.