This is while I have people on other websites telling me that they’ve never seen ANYONE attack Trayvon Martin’s character. I feel sometimes as though dealing with people in Bizarro World…

DN, first let me say that I appreciate your last statement. And you haven’t had too many grammatical errors I could see. We both are guilty of run-ons, so I would be the pot calling the kettle obsidian if I went there.

As far as Trayvon or Zimmerman’s thoughts or feelings go, we do have some ideas. Zimmerman himself has told us what he was thinking, both from his call to the dispatcher and from his subsequent questioning. Trayvon Martin’s thoughts have been relayed to us via Rachel Jeantel. Both accounts confirm that Trayvon was walking down the sidewalk when he was spotted by Zimmerman, who thought he looked suspicious and called the police. Martin then approached Zimmerman’s vehicle and made eye contact with him. Martin then ran, and Zimmerman jumped out of his car and ran after him, at which time he was told by the dispatcher that this was not needed. Within a few minutes, he’d caught up with Martin again, the confrontation ensued and degenerated into a fistfight, and once it had gotten to a certain point, Zimmerman pulled out his gun and killed Martin. I stand by my statement that Zimmerman’s suspicion was aroused by the sight of a black teenage male in a hoodie who he didn’t recognize walking down the sidewalk in his neighborhood. Had this been a white teenager wearing a U2 t-shirt, I don’t think Zimmerman would have jumped to the same suspicion.

As for Zimmerman’s perception of danger, that’s not an assumption – that’s the case that his defense attorneys were making. They were trying to say that Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin was self-defense because in their opinion, Zimmerman reasonably believed he was in danger of his life.

I don’t know that Zimmerman “simply made up a story”. I think he very likely believes what he said. The problem is that some key facts don’t line up with his account, and he’s never offered an explanation for this – his refusal to testify in court speaks volumes to me about this. But that doesn’t mean he committed premeditated murder or even that had a depraved mindset while following Martin. I think Zimmerman honestly thought he was pursuing a criminal, and he acted on that assumption. The problem is that he was wrong, so his approach was way off. That wouldn’t be a matter of 2nd Degree Murder so much as a case of Manslaughter – and yes, I do believe that Zimmerman was guilty of that.

And to be honest, I believe that both the prosecution and the defense were gambling in this trial. The defense was thinking they could get the whole matter tossed out, or have a jury verdict in 12 minutes, as happened the reverse way with Marissa Alexander. The prosecution, on the other hand, was positive they had Zimmerman on Manslaughter. The typical prosecution approach is to over-charge. They show a defendant that they’re throwing the book at him, and then when it comes to making a plea deal, they knock the whole thing down to a more reasonable size. But in this case, Zimmerman refused to make a plea deal – like Marissa Alexander, he rolled the dice on an all-or-nothing prospect. Since the prosecution had threatened the 2nd Degree Murder charge, they went ahead and pursued it in court, with the understanding that they would include Manslaughter and anything else they could before sending the jury off to decide the verdict. My reaction to the trial is that they did not prove 2nd Degree Murder, but they did prove Manslaughter. The jury was unable to find that, based on the way they interpreted the Manslaughter definition, and based on the influence of key jurors who clearly felt that Zimmerman was innocent. The other jurors capitulated and the result was a Not Guilty verdict in the area of 2nd Degree Murder and of Manslaughter.

This doesn’t totally end the equation, of course. Martin’s family has the right to sue Zimmerman in civil court, just as the Goldmans and Browns sued O.J. in the 90s. And if Zimmerman tries to make a windfall profit off this matter, say by suing Florida or suing NBC, or by writing a book, or selling his story to a movie producer, I have a feeling you’ll see that lawsuit materialize very quickly.

There’s a definite double standard being applied here. With this jury verdict, people who disagree with it are told “The jury has spoken. He was proven innocent. You lose. Be quiet.” With the O.J. verdict (and the Ramos & Compean matter, and the Casey Anthony verdict), we heard “The jury was wrong. This is unjust. We won’t forget the truth of what really happened in this case.”

In other words, when the right wing media likes a verdict, then that’s the end of the story. When they don’t like the verdict, then something’s amiss and they can continue to discuss it ad nauseum.

I’m trying to figure out when the judicial body of the great state of Florida was federalized. Because if I’m reading this post correctly, these guys are trying to say that this case was “U.S. v Zimmerman” rather than “State of Florida v Zimmerman”.

Does Wallace not know what court was trying the case?

“Alan Davey” appears to be the same person who fled another discussion on this site when he couldn’t back up his statements. Which is likely the same person who tried to blow up several other articles with nasty and mean-spirited comments both about the case and other posters.

But assuming this is the same “Alan” who ran into trouble on the “Who Needs a Jury” article, I would ask him to provide the humble apologies he still needs to offer for his conduct in the earlier discussion. He made nasty personal comments in my direction, regarding my litigation background, and I would hope that he would be prepared to own up to his earlier mistakes. This goes beyond his citation of non-existent witnesses and his cherry-picking of testimony to only hear the parts that lined up with his preconceptions.

It’s interesting that “Alan” brings up the jewelry matter from Trayvon’s school record. He forgets that nobody has ever claimed the jewelry and that there is no evidence that Trayvon actually did anything with those items other than hold onto them for another student, as he said he was doing. If this had been a neighborhood burglary, wouldn’t you think that someone would have claimed their property from the police? But let’s look past that, as the local police already have.

“Alan”, you may feel that the advice I have tried to offer you here and in the earlier article is not needed, but the fact is that you continue to make the same mistakes and misstatements that you did before. We’re trying to help you to learn something here. Please take some time to work on these issues and you may find it will be helpful for you. Obstinance continues to be a problem for you – a little humility would help solve that problem. Please look into it.

Your account of your unfortunate behavior in the prior article leaves out the part where I had to regularly correct your constant repetitions of the same talking points from right wing media. I posed specific questions to you there and here, and you were unable to answer them. In the prior article, you resorted to personal insults. In the current article, you’ve simply ignored the questions. Frankly, the best approach for you now would be to offer the humble and heartfelt apology called for by your prior insults. After that, you could attend to the tone you’ve been projecting. And perhaps after that point, you might be able to engage in these discussions without resorting to your previous behaviors. I seem to recall that when you were being corrected for your conduct in the past, you said you intended to end the conversation and leave. But then you couldn’t resist making further posts and thus digging yourself in deeper. Is there a reason that you continue to do this without offering the apologies you know you’ll need to eventually proffer?

Your attempt to dismiss George Zimmerman’s stalking of Trayvon Martin is strange. Zimmerman has admitted to following Martin, and we have witness testimony that Martin thought he had lost Zimmerman only for Zimmerman to find him again. We have multiple witness testimony to an argument that moved down the sidewalk until it degenerated into a fistfight – something that directly contradicts Zimmerman’s claim that Martin jumped out of the bushes and ambushed him. (Particularly since there were no bushes that Martin could have been hiding in) So where do you find “disinformation” in my factual recounting of Zimmerman’s behavior towards Trayvon Martin? We’re still waiting for ONE example and you have not been able to provide it. You have provided further insults, for which I think additional apologies from you are in order.

If you’re saying you’ve never posted here before, I have to wonder about that. We’ve had other posters trying the same approach as yours, in articles on this same subject. I find it curious that you take the identical opinion, tone and phrasing as some other people who no longer post on this site. Coincidence?

Ellen, thank you for embedding the Limbaugh comments into this article. People will need to remember that maneuver by him, to have it lie in state along with the various other nasty potshots he’s taken over time – from Sandra Fluke to Michael J. Fox to Iraq War Veteran protestors. I do hope there will come a day when the man is brought to account for the sheer nastiness he has fomented since he adopted this radio persona in the 80s.

As for the idea of Sean Hannity hosting a heartfelt discussion about race relations and the death of Trayvon Martin, I can’t imagine anything more hypocritical. That’s a subject I would think he should avoid by a long shot if he had any respect for the families involved.

What’s been nasty to the level of being sinister about the AM radio/Fox News coverage here has been the veneer of phony concern sitting atop some fairly racist ideas. On the one hand, you have the various hosts enthusiastically rooting for George Zimmerman to be acquitted and making increasingly nasty comments about Martin, his family and the witnesses speaking on his behalf. On the other, you have some of those same hosts taking a cue to “take it down for a moment” and solemnly talk about what a tragedy the whole thing is. And sitting just under the surface is a fairly rancid narrative of the situation.

Because while Hannity is trying to sound dignified and sensitive, the story he’s telling is anything but. As presented by Hannity and the other Fox News pundits, the story of this killing winds up being how Trayvon Martin was an uppity punk who attacked George Zimmerman, tried to viciously kill him and got what he deserved. Because when you peel back the veneer over what these pundits have been saying, it boils down to the idea that Martin deserved to be killed and that Zimmerman was right to kill him. What’s taken this past the point of being offensive is the whole “They’re gonna riot!!” meme – which is a short way of saying that those uppity people are going to have a race riot because they’re too immature to respect a jury verdict. (And this gets coupled usually with a shot about how there never should have been a trial in the first place – and there only was one because people were being uppity, not because there was any grounds.

These guys can try to explain this away, but that’s the basic rationale that underlies what has been a truly sad and scary moment for right wing punditry. It’s been a moment where these pundits have completely contradicted their own normal “law and order” stance to stick up for a man who killed a 17 year old in a situation that he not only could have avoided but was in fact TOLD to avoid.

It’s truly a sad state of affairs when someone like “John Smyth” feels it’s acceptable to go on a message board and do an end zone dance in the face of the families involved in this situation. I do wonder if he understands how offensive such a display really is.

Like any rational person will, I accept the verdict of this jury. These 6 people were not able to see around the various smokescreens of doubt that a skilled (and well-financed) defense team was able to raise. I accept this verdict in the same way that I accepted the verdict in the O.J. Simpson trial, and the Casey Anthony trial, and the Twilight Zone trial, and the Ramos & Compean trial. Because that is the nature of our judicial system. I wonder if the right wing pundits who are currently celebrating did so in any of the cases I just mentioned.

The facts of the situation remain unchanged. George Zimmerman will spend the rest of his days living with his behavior – both in the killing of an unarmed 17 year old and in the various untruths he told in the aftermath of his actions.

The facts have not changed that George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, followed him, stalked him after being told not to do so, confronted him, and killed him. The facts remain that Zimmerman was unable to explain how Trayvon Martin could have been hiding in bushes that didn’t exist, how Martin could have instantly attacked him when the neighbors heard their argument, how Martin could have been holding a hand over his nose and mouth when there was no DNA or blood on Martin’s hands, or how Martin could have seen and reached for a gun that was underneath Zimmerman and out of Martin’s ability to see. And the fact remains that Zimmerman’s refusal to testify to explain any of this left the jury without any way to resolve any of their questions.

Sadly, the jury in this case was left only with the testimony of the person who pulled the trigger, augmented only by the opinions of people who only saw or heard bits of what was happening.

In the case of Oscar Grant, there was irrefutable proof in the form of multiple digital videos taken of Meserle shooting Grant on the BART station floor. In that case, the jury was able to find him guilty of manslaughter, since they could see the exact sequence of events. In this case, the jury was left only with the version of events presented by Zimmerman, with nothing else other than people’s opinions and the background noises in a couple of 911 calls.

I don’t foresee any of the riots that the right wing seems to want to foment at the current time. I do see a situation where more people will despair about how one man can profile, follow, stalk, confront and kill another person, and essentially walk away.

MLP is right – Limbaugh has really been going for the prize in “Most Gleeful Cheerleading”.

Thanks to Truman and to Doors. Very kind words.

I’m frankly just disturbed by the way this case has been handled by AM radio and Fox News. It’s a genuinely scary thing to me to see people cheerleading the death of a 17 year old.

In the event that Zimmerman is somehow able to get away with his actions here, I don’t think you’ll see mass disorder. More likely that you could see an unhappy press conference or two and some angry columns online and in the press. In the event of Zimmerman being convicted, say, of manslaughter, you’ll definitely see right wing pundits decrying the “injustice” of it all.

But what has really been leaving a bad taste throughout has been the glee some right wingers have really been showing here. There’s a real sense of enthusiastic support for Zimmerman in a situation where one has to wonder about its basis. The whole notion of painting Trayvon Martin as somehow being the wrongdoer here is particularly distasteful, but the right wing approach has been to play the situation as Martin somehow deserving to be killed and Zimmerman deserving to be celebrated for having killed him. In the case of Ramos and Compean, it was obvious that the right wing pundits wanted the guys to get away with shooting Davila in the back – since this would send a message to Mexican drugrunners not to repeat his actions. In this case, the right wing “lesson” seems to be to tell young black men to “watch what they do, watch what they say”. And in 2013, that’s a scary premise indeed.

What you’re seeing here is a symptom of the complete breakdown within the Republican Party. Here you have Cavuto happily talking about hard right wing people trying to primary “RINO Republicans” for the offense of having tried to pass some bipartisan legislation. And you have him encouraging this person to spout a pile of nonsense about the IRS and her opinions without making the kind of vigorous challenges he would do with a person on the other side of the aisle. Wasn’t it only a month ago that he screamed at a guest and cut their microphone? But that person wasn’t arguing for the abolition of a major federal agency…

This was a pretty despicable move by the defense attorney – and it sounded like a desperation play. They were hoping the mother would somehow waver on her belief that the voice she heard was her son. But the mother has never wavered about that, so this was a blind alley for them to be trying.

And none of this changes the basic facts of the case – that Zimmerman profiled Martin, followed him, stalked him, confronted him and set in motion a fight that ended with him killing Martin. He ignored police instructions and the training he had received in terms of police work and Neighborhood Watch volunteer matters. He chose not to identify himself at any time, to any of the people in the neighborhood, and when he confronted Martin, he didn’t say anything about Neighborhood Watch concerns. His state of mind while he was chasing Martin is clear from the recorded call – he thought that Martin was another of those “$!ing punks” who “always get away”. And he figured he was going to make a heroic catch here. Instead, he provoked a fight that he found himself losing – until he pulled a gun and killed the other guy. The idea that he completely forgot the “Stand Your Ground” law is laughable.

There’s an interesting point that has been made about the testimony of the lead investigator earlier this week – where Zimmerman was apparently happy to hear that something of the fight had been recorded on a cell phone camera (which was actually a bogus idea). It’s very possible that Zimmerman was hoping that the footage would show him being beaten up and thus somehow qualifying for the “Stand Your Ground” defense. Zimmerman doesn’t seem to have ever understood the idea that instigating a fight does not allow one to then kill the opponent and then claim “self defense.”

Now, whether this will be enough to convince the jury that Zimmerman is guilty of 2nd Degree Murder is an open question. But the prosecution has an option after the defense presents its case to allow a “lesser included” offense to be considered by the jury. Meaning that they can allow the jury to consider manslaughter or negligent homicide. As even the Fox News sources have admitted, this is an extremely likely scenario – and a manslaughter conviction against Zimmerman could be compounded by the fact that it was manslaughter of a minor, and done with a handgun – which would automatically result in Zimmerman being sentenced to 30 years in prison. The prosecution is certainly aware of this. (And a strong case can be made that Zimmerman could have avoided all of this by pleading out to manslaughter or negligent homicide. Since he chose to hang tough, the prosecution brought the maximum charges against him and has been able to play those out in court, to his obvious chagrin.)

It’s interesting that Fox News is expending so much energy trying to defend Zimmerman, and trying to paint his supporters as liars and disreputable people. And beyond this, you have some of the Zimmerman supporters darkly predicting Rodney King-style riots breaking out if he somehow gets to walk away from this killing. I personally don’t see that happening. But in the event of a conviction of Zimmerman, I do see right wing media going up in arms about the “injustice” of the whole matter. They’ve already tried to play the game of saying that the charges were only brought due to politics. It’s only a short hop to saying that the conviction was due to the same thing.

doors,

I actually spent two hours with my dog (I should say my roommate’s dog) Angel, who was terrified of the fireworks. All the noise in the world in the house would not distract her. There were some loud displays in the area, and she wasn’t having any of it. I enjoy the 4th of July but it’s evident that Angel has some issues with it. On the other hand, if you didn’t know what those loud bangs were and you were a dog, that would be pretty scary…

I don’t hold Taafe’s DUI against him, as I can’t count the number of friends I’ve had who’ve made that kind of mistake. But I do think his “precious” comment was quite nasty.

Ryan Karl, your post here is as unfortunately challenged as the ones you made in the more recent thread.

I have already discussed Trayvon Martin’s issues at length below, if you’ll please take a minute to actually read what I presented.

Now, looking at the actual reports on Trayvon’s suspensions, and not on social media sites or right wing hit pieces on him, we get a different picture. Trayvon was first suspended in October 2011 after grafitting WTF on a door in the school. A school police officer searched his backpack looking for the marker and found a bag containing some jewelry, a watch and a flathead screwdriver. The officer asked Martin where the materials came from and Martin said he was holding it for another boy he wouldn’t name. Martin was suspended, and the materials were turned over to the local Miami-Dade police. We should note that these materials have never been reported as stolen and nobody has claimed them. We also don’t know if the screwdriver was in fact a burglary tool. All we know is that Martin shouldn’t have been holding them, and for this and his refusal to name who gave them to him, he was properly suspended.

Four months later, in January 2012, Martin was caught at school with an empty marijuana baggie and a marijuana pipe and got suspended again. In February 2012, he was suspended a third time, for being tardy and skipping classes. There has been discussion on social media about Martin being suspended for fighting, but the record doesn’t reflect this. Martin certainly sounds in his texts like he wanted to act tough and ganster-ish with his friends, but I could say the same of half the people I went to high school with back in the day. Some of the sillier moments in my life have been dealing with both high school age middle class kids and middle-aged people from suburbia trying to use rap lingo to make themselves sound cool. I don’t begrudge Martin for doing the same things that I saw many kids doing back in the day. I don’t think it speaks well of his level of maturity, and he sure wasn’t a model student. But as some kind of menace to society? Please.

Now, you’re correct to say that Trayvon’s mother told him to go stay with his father and Trayvon texted that he’d been “kicked out”. But he wasn’t out wandering the streets looking for a place to stay. He was staying in a nice condo in a nice residential area in Sanford with his father and his father’s fiancée. The issue of him being told to stay with the other parent is one typical in divorced households. The mother gets fed up with the son and tells him “Go stay with your father”. I can’t tell you how many middle class kids I knew in high school where this happened at one time or another. Again, this doesn’t make him some kind of menace to society, and it does not justify George Zimmerman shooting him to death.

As you yourself put it, “don’t get it twisted”. I agree. You should take those words to heart.

Mark, you’re absolutely right, and that thought did go through my mind.

For the record, the Whitney Houston rants that Kobylt went on (and his co-host happily laughed at on the air) included things like calling her a “crack ho”. And yes, they got spanked for that one and were forced to make an apology on the air.

So there’s a definite possibility that Kobylt is taking this approach to give himself cover from anyone labeling him as racist. I don’t think KFI wants to be politically correct at all, however. They are an openly right wing, pro-GOP radio station. Their morning news guy happily predicted a Mitt Romney victory in January 2012 while on his Sunday show. They regularly tout the various right wing memes and talking points. John and Ken are afternoon drive-time shock jocks. Their whole MO is to rile up their listeners with cheap shots at whatever politician they want to insult or embarrass, and whatever ethnic group they feel safe to attack at that moment. Normally, they are very much on the rampage about “illegal immigration” – but when the Bell fiasco happened, they suddenly switched up and interviewed multiple residents of that town who were undocumented, just so that they could throw things at the Bell supervisors who had grafted that city.

So I think Kobylt is probably doing this on his own – but you could be right that the station wants someone there to take the contrary position, given that all the other hosts are solidly cheerleading for Zimmerman here. (This includes Bill Carroll, Tim Conway Jr, and Bill Handel’s gang in the morning, not to mention the previously mentioned news guy Gary Hoffman, who made the unfortunate prediction about Romney…)

I’d be curious to see if she follows through with this. Just to see whether she would adjust her editorial slant when back on CNN. Would she maintain the Fox News approach or would she depart from the party line?

Laura Ingraham is clearly filling in for O’Reilly while he takes his summer vacation for July 4th. I’d expect fill-in hosts all week this week as well, and probably a clip show on Thursday. I have a feeling that you’ll see Hannity and Van Susteren doing the same thing.

Back to Zimmerman – today they introduced the audio of his statements about Martin jumping out of the bushes, punching him and threatening him. I wonder how Zimmerman’s defenders will try to reconcile these statements with all the witness testimony that contradicts them…

Michael, your post is mystifying.

You admit that Zimmerman caused the confrontation but then try to deny that he has no culpability for its result? You try to blame the whole fight on Trayvon Martin? But the best part is where you try to say that Zimmerman’s only option while losing a fight was to shoot the other guy to death. So if I get in a fight today, and I’m losing the fight, do I have the right to shoot my opponent to death? If that’s the case, we’ve established a whole new standard of conduct in society.

And apparently Alan Davey is back with us, after saying he was going to end his participation. It is unfortunate that he forgot to include the apologies we discussed in the last exchange. It’s also unfortunate that he has apparently dodged every question I directed to him. I’m not sure whether to think he’s conceding those points.

Alan’s comments now discuss the testimony of Investigator Cerino, who said that he thought that Zimmerman was either telling the truth or an extremely skillful liar. (Cerino went farther to say that he could be a pathological liar, but I’m not thinking along those lines.)

Alan also seems to want to predict a race riot at the end of this trial. This is strange. I thought he didn’t want to play the race card, and here he is doing it, now for the second time.

Alan also apparently missed the discussion on O’Reilly where some very serious potential penalties for Zimmerman were mentioned. In short, the expert being questioned believes that the trial may well result in a manslaughter conviction. But even a manslaughter conviction carries a sentence of 30 years in Florida, given that Zimmerman killed a minor. The 30 year sentence would also apply due to Zimmerman’s use of a firearm in the killing.

On Hannity’s show, one of the experts made very clear that there absolutely are discrepancies in Zimmerman’s story – where he says he was just getting out to check for an address and that he was just walking back to his car rather than following and stalking Trayvon Martin. Hannity and Peter Johnson tried to shout over her, but she still got her statement out in spite of them.

Fox News seems bent on declaring the trial over every day – they just did it again on Hannity this evening. Unfortunately for Fox, the trial still has more weeks to go. I wouldn’t dream of predicting an instant outcome at this time. I only know that Zimmerman is facing serious charges and serious jail time for a very serious crime. It’s unfortunate that some people seem to want to cheerlead about it. I guarantee that neither Zimmerman nor Martin’s family would share in that idea.