Trayvon Martin Case Updates: 2 Judges Recuse, "graphic pictures" of Zimmerman's Injuries, Bond set at $150K (ethics, attorney)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Make an effective argument in Zimmerman's case instead of dismissing anyone that thinks differently from you as a racist. It's nothing more than a logical fallacy and what is making your arguments so weak.
Of course the burden of proof in Z-man's case is on the prosecution.
Z-man is guilty of being stupid.
Z-man is guilty of being irresponsible.
Z-man is guilty of lying to the court.
What I don't see is any substantial evidence that what Z-man did that night makes him guilty of second degree murder or even a lesser offense given the peculiarities of Florida law. Individuals who have been in a much less threatening situation than Z-man have been released without charges due to the SYG law.
Precisely. Repeat that over and over to yourself in the context of all the wishful thinking posted here that indicts Z on the wildest sort of speculation from mind reading to an imaginary incident of peering over the hedge. It is motivated by racism. If this had been a white teen we would never have heard of this case. Daily incidences of black on black crime where literally innocent babes are shot from there parents arms by merciless, fatherless black teenage thugs and some of you want logical clear headed people to buy the Al Sharpton version or that loon representative from Florida with the pimp cowboy hat screaming "he was hunted down like a rabid dog".
It really makes one ashamed of the devolution of our society. You want to do something to help lost young souls like Trayvon Martin. Find them a father and vote for people that will create jobs it replace food stamps and unemployment and welfare checks.
Yes indeed things that are probable rather than demonstrable are the realm of rhetoric. I think you may have selected the best title for this considerable thread. It is unfortunate you lack the discernment of what that means. It is nonetheless, when not understood, merely parroting of a renowned thinker not an understanding of the thinker.
The physical evidence is corroborated by Zimmermans taped account the following day. With respect to the contentions of many here that want to censor me because I am capable of meeting mean with mean. Well. I don't set out to. It is hypo racy as well as ignorance and pretentiousness I am defending myself against.
Wrong. The fact that you believe this to be the case only illustrates your own ignorance. Going back to Aristotle, things that are probable rather than demonstrable are the realm of rhetoric.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valerie d
Precisely. Repeat that over and over to yourself in the context of all the wishful thinking posted here that indicts Z on the wildest sort of speculation from mind reading to an imaginary incident of peering over the hedge. It is motivated by racism. If this had been a white teen we would never have heard of this case.
You seriously think that if Trayvon had been white that we wouldn't have heard about it? Really? There's nothing the media loves more than a white kid killed under potentially suspicious circumstances. Personally I think we would have heard about it earlier, if that had been the case. But that's neither here nor there. The fact is is that we all have heard about it. So what? Innocence doesn't have to shy away from the light of the law? Crap, most of the time guilt doesn't have to shy away nowadays either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valerie d
Daily incidences of black on black crime where literally innocent babes are shot from there parents arms by merciless, fatherless black teenage thugs and some of you want logical clear headed people to buy the Al Sharpton version or that loon representative from Florida with the pimp cowboy hat screaming "he was hunted down like a rabid dog".
But why do you give some like Sharpton so much power? The guy is a relic from another era. He came to Baltimore a few years back and campaign people for the politician that he came to support had to go out and round some people from the neighborhood up so that it didn't look like Sharpton was appearing in front of a crowd of two. He's a media ***** now. That's it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valerie d
It really makes one ashamed of the devolution of our society. You want to do something to help lost young souls like Trayvon Martin. Find them a father and vote for people that will create jobs it replace food stamps and unemployment and welfare checks.
Why are you making Martin representative of a whole demographic? And wasn't Martin at the apartment because his father's girlfriend lived there? His father was obviously in his life to some extent, which is more than what a lot of kids have, although I don't think a father is a panacea for all ills either. And his mother had a good job. Now if you want to address the demographic you described, come on down to Baltimore. But I would say that fixing the incredibly grotesque educational system here is the first thing that has to be done in order to improve the situation of black, poor, males, in particular, in this city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valerie d
Yes indeed things that are probable rather than demonstrable are the realm of rhetoric. I think you may have selected the best title for this considerable thread. It is unfortunate you lack the discernment of what that means. It is nonetheless, when not understood, merely parroting of a renowned thinker not an understanding of the thinker.
So do you have an argument to counter a pretty basic interpretation of Aristotle? You could actually argue that most of this thread deals less with forensic rhetoric than it does epideictic rhetoric. That would be an interesting argument to have. And if you'd like to have a discussion about Aristotle, I'm certainly up for it. Whether for good or ill, I'm pretty confident in saying that, excluding classicists, few people have spent more time with his works than I have so . . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by valerie d
The physical evidence is corroborated by Zimmermans taped account the following day.
You can't expect everyone to take Zimmerman at his word. Few people have that luxury. But he did pass the voice test that he was administered so that was something. But then the police officer also noted inconsistencies. Does the one cancel out the other? Not necessarily, but it does make the situation much more complex. But frankly Zimmerman has a pretty basic ethos (credibility) issue that even Aristotle would have a field day with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valerie d
With respect to the contentions of many here that want to censor me because I am capable of meeting mean with Meehan. Well. I don't set out to. It is hypo racy as well as ignorance and pretentiousness I am defending myself against.
So just take the higher road, if that is how you feel. Just make an argument about the case, but you also, like everyone should, have to attend to the gaps, like the one people officer who said that his injuries weren't consistent with the life-or-death struggle that Zimmerman described. The best rhetoricians are those who can argue both sides of an argument. Now, personally I have a very hard time doing that, but it is helpful to think about the counter-arguments that someone who doesn't think like you might make in rebuttal.
I was out of the country when all of this started, so I don't have a dog in this race. And not having kept up on everything since then, I'm only able to speak about certain things regarding this case. But I will say that reading the thread, it's actually more interesting to read people's different interpretations of the evidence and situation than flat out dismissal of all of this as racism.
Of course the burden of proof in Z-man's case is on the prosecution.
Z-man is guilty of being stupid.
Z-man is guilty of being irresponsible.
Z-man is guilty of lying to the court.
What I don't see is any substantial evidence that what Z-man did that night makes him guilty of second degree murder or even a lesser offense given the peculiarities of Florida law. Individuals who have been in a much less threatening situation than Z-man have been released without charges due to the SYG law.
While I'm not sure that what he did warrants a murder 2 charge, I most definitely think he should be charged with something, maybe in the manslaughter range.
He WAS stupid and irresponsible; so are people who get behind the wheel of a car after drinking alcohol and then causing a fatal accident. Just because they didn't set out to kill someone doesn't mean that their actions didn't cause that death and that they shouldn't have to face the consequences.
Hell, you can go to prison just for driving recklessly (no alcohol involved) and putting other people's lives in danger.
I don't believe that SYG applies here, but I guess that will ultimately be decided at trial.
I do believe that Zimmerman's careless and stupid actions caused the death of a teenage kid and that he should face the consequences.
Of course the burden of proof in Z-man's case is on the prosecution.
Z-man is guilty of being stupid.
Z-man is guilty of being irresponsible.
Z-man is guilty of lying to the court.
What I don't see is any substantial evidence that what Z-man did that night makes him guilty of second degree murder or even a lesser offense given the peculiarities of Florida law. Individuals who have been in a much less threatening situation than Z-man have been released without charges due to the SYG law.
But this is what I find frightening about this law, besides the fact that a vampire used it:
"Cases with similar facts show surprising — sometimes shocking — differences in outcomes. If you claim "stand your ground" as the reason you shot someone, what happens to you can depend less on the merits of the case than on who you are, whom you kill and where your case is decided."
You seriously think that if Trayvon had been white that we wouldn't have heard about it? Really? There's nothing the media loves more than a white kid killed under potentially suspicious circumstances. Personally I think we would have heard about it earlier, if that had been the case. But that's neither here nor there. The fact is is that we all have heard about it. So what? Innocence doesn't have to shy away from the light of the law? Crap, most of the time guilt doesn't have to shy away nowadays either.
But why do you give some like Sharpton so much power? The guy is a relic from another era. He came to Baltimore a few years back and campaign people for the politician that he came to support had to go out and round some people from the neighborhood up so that it didn't look like Sharpton was appearing in front of a crowd of two. He's a media ***** now. That's it.
Why are you making Martin representative of a whole demographic? And wasn't Martin at the apartment because his father's girlfriend lived there? His father was obviously in his life to some extent, which is more than what a lot of kids have, although I don't think a father is a panacea for all ills either. And his mother had a good job. Now if you want to address the demographic you described, come on down to Baltimore. But I would say that fixing the incredibly grotesque educational system here is the first thing that has to be done in order to improve the situation of black, poor, males, in particular, in this city.
So do you have an argument to counter a pretty basic interpretation of Aristotle? You could actually argue that most of this thread deals less with forensic rhetoric than it does epideictic rhetoric. That would be an interesting argument to have. And if you'd like to have a discussion about Aristotle, I'm certainly up for it. Whether for good or ill, I'm pretty confident in saying that, excluding classicists, few people have spent more time with his works than I have so . . .
You can't expect everyone to take Zimmerman at his word. Few people have that luxury. But he did pass the voice test that he was administered so that was something. But then the police officer also noted inconsistencies. Does the one cancel out the other? Not necessarily, but it does make the situation much more complex. But frankly Zimmerman has a pretty basic ethos (credibility) issue that even Aristotle would have a field day with.
So just take the higher road, if that is how you feel. Just make an argument about the case, but you also, like everyone should, have to attend to the gaps, like the one people officer who said that his injuries weren't consistent with the life-or-death struggle that Zimmerman described. The best rhetoricians are those who can argue both sides of an argument. Now, personally I have a very hard time doing that, but it is helpful to think about the counter-arguments that someone who doesn't think like you might make in rebuttal.
I was out of the country when all of this started, so I don't have a dog in this race. And not having kept up on everything since then, I'm only able to speak about certain things regarding this case. But I will say that reading the thread, it's actually more interesting to read people's different interpretations of the evidence and situation than flat out dismissal of all of this as racism.
But this is what I find frightening about this law, besides the fact that a vampire used it:
"Cases with similar facts show surprising — sometimes shocking — differences in outcomes. If you claim "stand your ground" as the reason you shot someone, what happens to you can depend less on the merits of the case than on who you are, whom you kill and where your case is decided."
You went to a lot of trouble to prove you are both worthy of debate and employ a measure of objectivity. So far I don't think we have much to contend with. My response to some does not equal my response to all. As a young college student an old and well respected psychology teacher,( I despise the idiotic discipline along with most social sciences, the pseudoscience panacea of modernists quacks that legitimize homosexuality and every manner of deviancy), once said to me, "you come at me fist doubled up don't expect I won't come back with fist doubled up".
When I carve a ham or a steak, the first thing I do is cut off the fat. I have no tolerance for fluff, cotton candy, or clouds with handles. When the syg law was passed the next day a golf cart pulled into my back yard. My son asked should I get the shotgun mom? Of course we laughed it off. Frankly, considering the nut bags in this society I find the suggestion in the hands of a predominance of lunatics, that anyone might justify the slightest aggression as cause for deadly force, a little hard to digest.
Having said so let the buyer beware! If you kill someone in self defense, better damn well have a good reason. I believe Z will have little problem demonstrating he had good reason. Inwascwondering if some of the child psychology majors here would have made a distinction in events if Trayvon had been killed on his eighteenth birthday?
Here we have a kid with the neck of a linebacker and obviously the strength and self confidence to take on an adult. I seriously doubt it was his first rodeo with regard to fighting. I think it is highly likely it went down under very similar circumstances as Zimmerman iterated. To believe he is a cold blooded killer that went on the hunt seeking this result is a fools foolishness. To come to that conclusion leaves me to look for a reason a "psychological motivation" for such a leap of imagination. I call that motivation reverse racism . It is fueled by black politician vote whores, O Bama included and the traditional race baiters, sharp tongue and tha Revrund Jacksun and a liberal news network that lacks the credibility of a drug store novel.
Last edited by valerie d; 06-30-2012 at 05:25 PM..
You went to a lot of trouble to prove you are both worthy of debate and employ a measure of objectivity. So far I don't think we have much to contend with. My response to some does not equal my response to all. As a young college student an old and well respected psychology teacher,( I despise the idiotic discipline along with most social sciences, the pseudoscience panacea of modernists quacks that legitimize homosexuality and every manner of deviancy), once said to me, "you come at me fist doubled up don't expect I won't come back with fist doubled up".
When I carve a ham or a steak, the first thing I do is cut off the fat. I have no tolerance for fluff, cotton candy, or clouds with handles. When the syg law was passed the next day a golf cart pulled into my back yard. My son asked should I get the shotgun mom? Of course we laughed it off. Frankly, considering the nut bags in this society I find the suggestion in the hands of a predominance of lunatics, that anyone might justify the slightest aggression as cause for deadly force, a little hard to digest.
Having said so let the buyer beware! If you kill someone in self defense, better damn well have a good reason. I believe Z will have little problem demonstrating he had good reason. Inwascwondering if some of the child psychology majors here would have made a distinction in events if Trayvon had been killed on his eighteenth birthday?
Here we have a kid with the neck of a linebacker and obviously the strength and self confidence to take on an adult. I seriously doubt it was his first rodeo with regard to fighting. I think it is highly likely it went down under very similar circumstances as Zimmerman iterated. To believe he is a cold blooded killer that went on the hunt seeking this result is a fools foolishness. To come to that conclusion leaves me to look for a reason a "psychological motivation" for such a leap of imagination. I call that motivation reverse racism . It is fueled by black politician vote whores, O Bama included and the traditional race baiters, sharp tongue and tha Revrund Jacksun and a liberal news network that lacks the credibility of a drug store novel.
I was all set to systematically dissect your arguments point by point but then I got to your last paragraph and realized the only thing that matters is Trayvon's color. Old joke.
While it's unlikely Zimmerman meant to become a cold-blooded killer that night you also imply that Trayvon could take down a Navy Seal with his bare hands in the same paragraph.
The judge seems to be on a witch hunt. Zimmerman is not a flight risk so grant him bond and be done with it.
What would make you think he isn't a flight risk? He has gotten off on every f-up he's gotten himself into BC of his parents' connections, he has family in another country and he has nothing here- no career, nothing. He tried to hang on to his passport, he's a liar and he knows the truth will come out. Mommy and daddy can't help him out of this one except to get him out of the country. He and his wife will be out of here, IMO.
What would make you think he isn't a flight risk? He has gotten off on every f-up he's gotten himself into BC of his parents' connections, he has family in another country and he has nothing here- no career, nothing. He tried to hang on to his passport, he's a liar and he knows the truth will come out. Mommy and daddy can't help him out of this one except to get him out of the country. He and his wife will be out of here, IMO.
The odds of conviction are so low that the flight risk is negligible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
