Confounded: How The Trayvon Martin Story Has Baffled The Conservative Press
March 27, 2012 10:38 am ET by Eric Boehlert
Addressing the unfolding story of an unarmed, 17-year-old Florida teen recently killed by a neighborhood watch activist who has not been charged with a crime, Fox News host Jon Scott recently wondered out loud whether the Trayvon Martin case really deserved the national media attention it was receiving. While Fox colleague Jim Pinkerton explained that the coverage stemmed from the fact that the press is "always interested in the cute child that gets murdered" and the "black victim of racism," Scott's query captured the larger Fox News feeling about the mushrooming Martin report, which was to view the story with a mixture of uncertainty and bafflement.
It seemed the Martin story simply did not fit the right-wing's preferred narrative about guns and minorities and how white America is allegedly under physical assault from Obama's violent African-American base. Or, as Rush Limbaugh famously put it, "[I]n Obama's America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering."
The conservative media have spent the last three years utterly obsessed with the topic of race in America, but only when they can frame that issue dishonestly; only when conservatives can use news events for race baiting purposes. So as the Martin story morphed into a national conversation about race and guns and the law, many conservative media voices remained silent early on. (A silence later replaced by attempts to smear the young victim.)
For a snapshot, TVeyes.com indicates that between March 15 and 25, "Trayvon Martin" was mentioned nearly 500 times on CNN, 350 times on MSNBC, but less than 100 times on Fox News. Through the end of last week, for instance, Fox's late afternoon round table discussion show, The Five, had never discussed the Martin shooting, according to a Nexis review.
Never.
Last week on Bill O'Reilly's primetime show there were more on-air mentions of "Media Matters" than there were "Trayvon Martin." O'Reilly devoted a Talking Points Memo segment to each.
And when Fox News did wade into the controversy last week the results were somewhat disastrous, like when Geraldo Rivera suggested it was the sweatshirt hoodie the Florida teen was wearing that was responsible for his death; a comment that was widely ridiculed. (His later suggestion that Martin was dressed like a "wannabe gangster" didn't help matters.)
Fox's initial muted response, especially from it's nighttime opinion shows, stood in stark contrast to the channel's previous cheerleading for the "Stand Your Ground" law, which remains at the center of the Martin controversy. Backed by gun advocates, the Florida law puts the burden on prosecutors to disprove claims of self-defense from shooters who use deadly force. When the law was passed in 2005, critics warned about looming citizen confrontations like the one that ended Martin's life.
Yet rather than vigorously defend the law in the wake of the teen's killing, and rather than offering up coherent analysis of the story, Fox opinion makers mostly preferred to look away, reluctant to engage in the debate. Perhaps, as Orlando Sentinel columnist Beth Kassab wrote last week, that's because "There is no good way for gun proponents to spin the death of an unarmed teenager."
Without Fox News to show the way, much of the conservative press seemed adrift and unsure with how to proceed last week.
From the Moderate Voice, March 23:
There was a lot of buzz about Fox News initially ignoring the Trayvon Martin killing. What most people haven't noted is that nearly every major conservative blog is completely ignoring the story. If you search for the word "Trayvon" on Hot Air, Michelle Malkin, Power Line, and Instapundit, you come up with zilch. There's not a single mention on Drudge.
Most of the blogs did eventually weigh in on the Martin story -- in order to condemn Obama for respectfully acknowledging the controversy. ("If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon.") Malkin lashed out at the president for being "all too willing to pour gas on the fire." In fact, it was Obama's comments regarding Martin that seemed to free up conservatives and prompt them to treat the story of a dead teenager as a purely partisan one; a contest between the left and right. That's the terrain they feel most comfortable on.
In retrospect, the conservative press would have been better off maintaining its distance from the story since in recent days more and more far-right outlets have veered into the ugly territory of trying to smear a dead teenager in an effort to defuse the story and to shift the blame away from the gunman, George Zimmerman.
Those wholesale attacks on Martin, sadly reminiscent of the right-wing media's sex-based assaults on Sandra Fluke's reputation, have revolved around loaded innuendos about the boy's past, posting bogus photos of him online, retrieving tweets from the slain teenager's closed Twitter account, and pretending the Martin story revolves around a small band of irrelevant New Black Panther Party members. (That's been the Daily Caller specialty.)
Just look at Breitbart blogger Dan Riehl who over the weekend posted a foolish and offensive piece that claimed a photo of Martin widely used by the press has been "altered" and lightened to make him appear less threatening. (It hadn't been altered.)
Riehl also went searching for old Facebook photos of Martin. He suggested he found one that featured a young boy posing in his underwear flashing an obscene hand gesture. He later took the photo down because he could not confirm it was the Martin who was murdered (it wasn't), never bothering to explain what relevance old Facebook pictures had to do with the Florida killing.
Still, Michelle Malkin's new site Twitchy followed the misguided lead and also posted the same Facebook picture, suggesting the press had been hiding it because it made Martin look more menacing.
Malkin's site was then forced to post a correction and apology:

Unable to engage the Martin story on the facts, large portions of the conservative press simply ignored the details until they felt comfortable actively smearing the dead teen. Neither approach reflected well on the movement.









Tell me something, highliter: why do you so desperately want a 17-year-old with no criminal record or history of violent behavior to have had it coming?
And the 9/11 calls, and the fact that the 9/11 operator told Zimemrman not to pursue, and the history of Zimmerman, and the fact that Trayvon was not armed, and the fact that the shooter had a criminal record and the victim did not, and that Trayvon had every right to be where he was...
Talk about politicizing! You right wingers are willing to stand by and let a kid's murder go un-investigated because the powerful gun lobby and right wing media control your brain.
Trayvon's past you need to know...
Zimmerman is a registered Democrat. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
I don't understand what all these "truths" about Trayvon Martin are supposed to reveal? That he deserved to be murdered by a man who ignored emergency dispatch orders to not follow him?
What, exactly, are you trying to argue with these "truths"?
Although, his black-ness is undisputable, I haven't heard of any toxicology reports claiming that he had any THC in his system. In order for him NOT to have, he would have to have refrained from the reefer for at least a month, assuming that he ever partook in the first place.
Of course, he was actually suspended for a baggie with residue in his bookbag. There was no pipe, there was actually no pot. It is entirely possible that it wasn't even his bag.
But even if it was, who cares?
LOL.I think I'll call my local PD with an anonymous tip about the major burglary ring operating out of my garage. Hopefully a search will turn up the dozens of 'burglary tools' I've been looking for over the past few years.
I think what makes Ravin''s 'history that we need to know' so important is all of the question marks and assertions of things that 'might have' happened.
That's actually my second journey to the Daily Mail in as many days. A wingnut Facebook friend yesterday linked to the latest in a thousand 'final nails in the coffin' of the global warming alarmist hoax - some out-of-context discovery of crystals showing that the Medeival Warming Period showed some effects as far as Antarctica.
This completely refuted the imaginary idea that global warming is based entirely on the MWP being isolated in Europe. Reliable sources R Us.
Hmm. I wonder where I have stashed all the loot?
"...In fact, it was Obama's comments regarding Martin that seemed to free up conservatives and prompt them to treat the story of a dead teenager as a purely partisan one; a contest between the left and right. That's the terrain they feel most comfortable on.
In retrospect, the conservative press would have been better off maintaining its distance from the story since in recent days more and more far-right outlets have veered into the ugly territory of trying to smear a dead teenager in an effort to defuse the story and to shift the blame away from the gunman, George Zimmerman..."
Registered Democrat? What does that have to do with anything? So Zimmerman knew all those things before he confronted Trayvon?
They're bending over backwards to turn a murderer into some sort of folk hero.
I saw another wingnut item yesterday, about scary union thugs demonstrating outside of a bankers home, where it was explicitly mentioned that the target was a Democrat, a Clinton administration guy.
They don't seem to catch that what they think is support for their BS usually backfires on their point.
Excellent point Andy. You mean like Sara Palin to neutralize Hillary Clinton and Herman Cain to snatch that black vote away from President Obama. These Right Wing Gomers really just don't get it.
Oh know, you mean he was a Democrat! Why didn't someone let me know earlier! That changes everything! Paleeeeeeeez. It's so obvious these Right Wing Chuckleheads imagine every one thinks like they do.
Since when have right-wingers started thinking?
Do we have a source for that claim of his party affiliation? Oh, wait, it came from RR. No source.
But Bernie Goetz was arrested and convicted.
-Actual Daily Phail headline
BTW, are you aware of Zimmerman's past? He wasarrested for domestic violence, resisting an officer without violence and resisting an officer with violence. His father is a retired magistrate judge . . . all of these cases were "closed." Wonder why? It would appear that Mr. Zimmerman has some issues with violence.
Further, what the hell difference does his political club membership have to do with anything? He murdered this kid. I might add that the police investigator filed an affidavit the night of the crime stating that he felt that Zimmerman should have at least been charged with manslaughter. The State Attorney told him not to press charges.
For some reason they think that Democrats have the same membership rules.
Well, at least one of those cases the 2005, Assaulting a Police Officer and Resisting Arrest, both are a third degree felony in Florida. He bargained, and opted for, and completed, a "Diversion" type program, so the charges were dropped and the record expunged. And that is not unusual.
Hilarious.
So? Does that mean I want justice served any less? No.
What it does prove is the way the right winger in America's brain has been so rotted by false outrage and partisan hatred that they can't even conceive of an event in terms of fair and just, only "right and left" or "black and white" or republican or democrat.
I hope you don't blow off this response as just an attack, but instead take a moment to answer why it matters to YOU what political affiliation the shooter had.
Relevant, irrelevant; germane, non-germane; material, immaterial; worthy of mention, meaningless...
I don't care what Martin's past is or who Zimmerman is affiliated with politically. Hell, Zimmerman could have been one of the many republicans who registered democrat so they could skew the primaries. However, the issue is that an adult male felt that he had to shoot a 17 year old in the chest in order to defend himself against that unarmed 17 year old. Remember Zimmerman was following Martin, after he was told not to pursue him, so Martin actually could have felt threatened himself. I don't care about what races were involved, Zimmerman and the stand your ground law is unethical and absurd.
I'm curious to know if there's a tape of John's 911 call, who is one witness. Several others said it was Martin calling for help, which does in fact make John's account inconsistent with the others.
I can't believe you didn't mention that they didn't take Zimmerman's pistil.
That or he just thinks you mis-spelled "pistol".
S/B it's for......
Turns out the lead investigator, filed an affidavit that night, stating that he was not convinced of Zimmerman's account of the events. And I guess the DA' didn't think their was enough evidence to charge him.
And they think I have bad humor. That ranks with PI Day 3.14
(you didn't think I was going to be left out did you?)
Don't be surprised if people are Wagner fingers at ya' for that slip up!
Answer: "9W".
Question: "Herr Wagner, do you spell your name with a 'V'?"
Whatcha ya gonna do?
Still crushing on Jaye P Morgan?
And I'm still using moves I copped from Gene Gene the Dancing Machine.
It WILL be necessary! ;>) ;>) Woo Hoo!
"Raven Rog the Republican said, 'Boy, am I dumb."
[pause for laughter and obligatory "how dumb was he?" shout from audience.]
"'I'm so dumb,' he said, 'that when I went to the polling place on election day to vote, I mistakenly pulled the lever with my _________.'"
I would never do that to the memory of Charles Nelson Reilly.
Brothers!
They were the Lever Brothers!
Whilst criminal law is interesting as a study at the basic level, the reality, as pointed out by one of my lecturers, is far from the interesting studies we were reading about and more likely concerned an 18-30yr old male, intoxicated and refusing to pay for a pizza or a cab - not the stuff of great scholarship.
That good enough?
All of your teachers and employers must be so proud.
I'm afraid that your knowledge of the crucial matters of jurisprudence and Criminal Law procedure are somewhat lacking. What is your practical experience investigating homicides? What is your training in statutory interpretation?
I hope you're doing better in the medical field.
You should stop now.
Then tried to claim it was from Columbia and then backtracked as even he knew that was not plausible.
If that's the case, care to point out that course here?
OOPSY!
Fortunately for you, you are anonymous here. Add that it is doubtful that the military would waste the resources to track you down, even though they could, if they wanted to. Impersonating an officer is extremely illegal.
You might wish to curb the claims of higher education, an understanding of crime investigation procedure, and calling others "bozos" until you do.
Even if that's how the word is applied in "The Criminal Justice World", in all your years of training and practice in Criminal Justice Administration did you never learn to distinguish between common and specialized usages of words like "anonymous"?
This is a discussion forum on a website about media, not "The Criminal Justice World."
Your link? Because a second search on the ol' Google with the terms "anonymous," "criminal," "justice," "investigation," and "definition" didn't provide anything new.
It did provide a few hits to Anonymous Tip Lines where the promise was made that "your identity will be kept secret."
— adj
1. from or by a person, author, etc, whose name is unknown or withheld: an anonymous letter
The author (witness) in this case did not withhold their name from the police therefore the witness is not anonymous.
Exactly, highliter. Even if the police don't know the name of a witness, someone does. Therefore the person or author of the statement is always known. Therefore, there's no such thing as an anonymous witness. Right? Right.
I sure hope you didn't actually pay money for that education of yours.
Mark Felt wasn't an anonymous source because Woodward and Bernstein knew who he was.
No no no, you're getting ahead of yourself. Mark Felt wasn't an anonymous source first and foremost because Mark Felt knew his own name.
If the police are not releasing the name of a witness, they are working to protect that person's anonymity. You have absolutely no business calling anyone stupid.
The police are withholding the identity of the person whose identitiy they don't know? Huh?
I'm guessing he blames autocorrect, or the glare from his teakettle-shaped swimming pool.
As soon as Zimmerman disregarded the dispatcher's admonition that they didn't need him to follow the young man, he lost any claim of self-defense. He was stalking this young man. A young man, who I might add, was the only one who had any business in the gated community where he was stalked and murdered. He was an invited guest there. Zimmerman was not. He didn't live in the community.
Still keeping it stupid, I see, highliter. You gonna post a link which refutes your position for us?
Not that that scenario would excuse Zimmerman's actions, but if your facts are right, that makes it much more shocking that Zimmerman has been treated so delicately.
That neighborhood was holding meetings, allowed Zimmerman to appoint himself "Captain", but they were not registered with the National Neighborhood Association.
Also, Zimmerman did not take the NHW training program offered by the Sheriffs Office.
Chris Tulko, director of Neighborhood Watch, for the National "Zimmerman broke cardinal rules" one, being armed with a gun.
Chris Tulko, director of Neighborhood Watch, for the National Sheriff's Association, said "Zimmerman broke cardinal rules."
Besides my cursor jumping all over the place lately, the site is POSTING when I hit preview.
The crap they are spewing now is that the kid attacked Zimmerman. I do not believe an unarmed kid would "back track" to within 15 feet of his home, to attack a 28 year old man, that weighed a 100 lbs more (and probably taller) than he was.
In 2005 Zimmerman was arrested for assaulting a police officer, and resisting arrest. When he butted in when a friend was in a dispute with law enforcement. Zimmerman opted for, and completed a diversion type program, so the charges were dropped and his record expunged.
I'm so hoping that they get a ruling to over ride that expungement, so the jury can here about that arrest.
Prior bad acts are, however, extremely relevant in sentencing.
Your text to link here...
It must be emphasised that the defendant is tried only for the matter on the charge sheet. Essentially all other matters are irrelevant - different circumstances. The time to bring up prior bad acts is at sentencing.
His attorney's are already introducing his character, playing him up to be this wonderful hero, in another situation, regarding a suspect,(in his old neighborhood) so no doubt they will at trial.
I think in this case a charachter profile of Zimmerman will play a big part.
His 46 911 calls in 2011, that not one resulted in an arrest of a suspect. And his fixation on African Americans in those calls.
Even Chris Tulko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs Association, made a public statement that "Zimmerman broke cardinal rules." one being armed with a gun.
There have been murder trials were previous murder arrest were not allowed in as evidence .
"The jury will NEVER hear about..." and
"Niether WILL hear about it." both indicate an absolute certainty about the subject, but then you follow it with:
"Niether past arrest no convictions are USUALLY allowed..." meaning that sometimes they are, which completely belies the certainty professed earlier. Also, "It APPEARS..." is also a term fraught with uncertainty, and the statement it is attached to (using the self-defense strategy) is the basis for your certain argument of "...won't be allowed as evidence."
So, your're certain the jury will never hear about it...except that sometimes they do...but they might use the self-defense strategy, and if they do...then it's certain the evidence won't be allowed?
If that's your "proof" in response to Bronwyn, I smell fail.
This Stand Your Ground law stinks so bad. But I keep thinking about other felony crime cases. where they piled on other charges, even if the major one, they were going for wouldn't stick. They managed to convict on a lesser. I'm thinking of stalking, harassment, etc. If the SYG gets him off on the murder, surely they can go for something else. I'm too tired to think straight and you know more about it than I do but look at this. I just don't want to except him getting off scott free.
Whether true or not, I smell authoritarianism.
highliter and ravenrog are in such a pickle at this point. With they and their favored sources giving mixed messages (or no message), with no unified thoughtlet, now what? It must be frustrating. They want to treat the topic as a puzzle piece that fits into a favored and grand narrative. How, oh how, is this the enemy's fault?
Of course, justice fits in there somewhere, but don't go there until ready to take a position. Odd that rendering justice IS the position, but that topic is shelved until it can be used as a tool for some other cause.
Again, take a position, THEN mete out justice accordingly, which is when this stops being a justice issue. It becomes an authoritarian issue.
If they had an internal debate that night, that is going to throw a big damper in some of the claims they have since made.
I do believe that the abhorrent nature of the "stand your ground" legislation had a tendency to nobble the investigation over its perversion of the plea of self-defence but the all around sloppiness that is evident (the failure to identify the victim is possibly the most egregious) is most disturbing.
More significant than the guilt of Zimmerman (I still have this vision of an aged character in mask and tights shuffling around this gated community on his walking frame demanding everyone explain their presence) will be the investigation into the procedural failures of the police and any other systemic and personnel problems that may exist. It is feasible that this could have quite serious repercussions. The DOJ investigation could possibly look at this - not so much the civil rights of Trayvon Martin as those of his parents and the unnecessary anguish they suffered due to the contempt with which his shooting and the common decencies towards his family were treated.
No need to thank me, Andy ;>)
But in defense of Zimmerman? The hoodie gave him no choice.
And how I figured out who ilovedoughnuts's sister is.
Did you follow the rest of it?
....
Wow, just skimmed through. Glad I missed that one. ;0)
Not saying it isn't the truth, but it reeks of desperation.
I just don't believe that the law allows the police to hear the words "I felt threatened" and then send the guy who just took a life off with a pat on the back. That sure seems to be the way that night went in this case, though.
Yes that evidence would be on Martins body, if the shot took place at point blank rage there will be powder burns on the victim’s body and clothing.
Already known
Again there is no reason to do this it’s already know.
Zimmerman claimed that Martin attempted to take the gun from him. If that were true, there would be fingerprints on the gun. The police should have taken the gun to test it for fingerprints at least.
Ever notice it's only the semi-literate people who say things like this?
If you don't care enough to learn to communicate properly, why on earth should we listen to what you have to say?
You know, be a good Republican and take responsibility for yourself and admit that the treatment you get from us is the treatment you deserve.
BTW, the police investigator filed an affidavit on the night of the crime stating that he wanted to file manslaughter charges against Zimmerman, but the State Attorney refused to allow the charge.
...OTOH, He might not. Who knows? Mysterious ways and all, you know?
And why would I address your post otherwise? You have already FREQUENTLY shown yourself to be immune to logic and facts; I don't see any sense in wasting my time and effort refuting your idiotic assumptions.
This is part of investigation.
BTW, if you aren't watching the news there was just BREAKING NEWS (ABC) that the lead investigator did in fact file an affidavit that night, stating that he was not convinced of Zimmerman's account of the events and wanted him charged with manslaughter. And his authorities claimed there wasn't enough evidence. So there was an internal debate going on with the law enforcement that night.
No wonder the lead investigator stepped down he definitely would have be getting crap from both ends.
by aBeck in 10-O-C (34 minutes ago)
4
Mother Jones has confirmed that the police seized Zimmerman's gun.
Not mentioned was WHEN the gun was siezed. He still has his license to carry and with it, by Florida law, can legally buy another without a waiting period.
I did some research last night and found a few-days-old local news station video on their interview with the witness.
From the transcript of the news segment.
The witness only wanted to be identified as "John," and didn't want to be shown on camera.
"The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: 'help, help'…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911," he said.
Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.
"When I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point," John said.
Adding a note of confusion was the online copy of the police report.
In the "offenses section" of police report it reads as:
Homicide-negligent manslaughter-unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act.
--------------------------------------------
Already known? Really the police can tell without testing that a bullet lodged in someones chest is the same type of bullet from a gun by just looking at it? Dude you really sholuld get your monmey back from that online class..
Martin, an adolescent male African-American, found himself being stalked in the dark by an armed man. As has been pointed out by many learned commentators, to run, for him, was to invite a bullet in the back. Put simply, Zimmerman's actions would have put any African-American male of Martin's age in fear for his life. The recounted telephone conversation with his girlfriend backs this up.
Under the standard Common Law definition of self-defence Martin was within his rights to take whatever action he thought was necessary to defend his life. The action described by "John" would be well within the bounds of appropriate action against an armed stranger who was stalking him.
Adrenalin would have been his only weapon against this terrifying gunman.
The action described by "John" would be well within the bounds of appropriate action against an armed stranger who was stalking him.
Possibly, but again how would Martin know Zimmerman was armed. It is not against the law to follow someone and ask what they are doing. Nor would it be reasonable to hit someone who simply asked what you're doing here? If he had the gun out that would be a completely different story.
The point is we don't know what happened yet Everyone needs to stop making assumptions
Detain no, approach and question yes. You don’t need any type of authority to ask someone what they are doing there.
We have absolutely no way of knowing who pushed who.
you right he dosent have to answer.
Again nothing illegal about any of that.
And you tell me, highliter. If you are walking along and notice someone stalking you, are you just going to belly-up and let them do what they want with you?
Trayvon Martin.
And he would have been correct.
I wonder how you would be spinning this if it had been Zimmerman who had died that night.
Also, under no circumstances should any community watch member be armed.
Plus
1) they are not to be armed with a gun.
2) They are supposed to take the NHW training offered by the Sheriff's office.
3) The NHW association should be and this one wasn't, registered with the National Neighborhood Watch Association.
According to Chris Tulko, directer of National Neighborhood Watch Associations, these independent NHW groups, are in most cases a hindrance and make it difficult for the intentions of the actual registered NHW.
It's night, you've got a stranger, tracking your every step, and somehow we're supposed to accept the idea that Zimmerman was just behaving reasonably and Martin had no reason to be alarmed?
Look to the smug, the self-righteous, the comfortably off, the would-be rugged individual. Look to the self-proclaimed God-fearing "nice" people because in there with a lot of decent-hearted well-meaning types there is a nest of vipers that has poisoned many communities to the point where anti-social behaviour has taken on a cloak of respectability and dysfunction rules.
Seems to me that Zimmerman WAS, indeed, fearful. He was fearful that the cries for help would bring in bystanders who might interfere with his righteous killing of a n****r that he had caught fair and square.
And not by the toe.
I know, I know. I am a bad man.
Sue me.
According to the reports the pistol was worn exposed on the hip. That would have probably been visible at least in silhouette.
And, as if we needed it, more proof that highliter is an idiot.
They did.
'They did.'
Then I can't wait to see pictures of the injuries that weren't visible in the video of him being brought into the station!
And what about ballistics tests and residue testing of Zimmerman's hands?
I wondered why they didn't canvas the neighborhood, and why they didn't run the addresses through AIRS to get names of the residents in those homes (the ones that didn't answer during the canvasing) and most likely ages too, and if the one right by the body showed a teenage boy living there, etc, but they screwed up big time. And Trayvon's name would have shown up because, he has been questioned by police, and that alone w/h put his name, and any addresses, he stays at in the AIRS, LEDS, system.
I don't know, maybe, the father lives with the girlfriend because, the father kept referring it to "as his (victims) home"
"Less than a football field" is the distance from the street.
Trayvon Martin's father retraces son's final steps
I think since I watched it I've been hearing 15' in the media. I don't know where I got it, but appreciate you pointing out the error. There is way too much misinformation going around. Thanks again.
Which would be another thing the Right Wing Propaganda Machine would be crowing about as a reason to shoot him.
Interesting that they haven't brought it up.
I see no point in arguing with a psychopath, so I am just pointing out that your spelling reflects your intellect and sanity.
An officer at the scene overheard Zimmerman saying, "I was yelling for someone to help me but no one would help me," the report said.
[snip]
Another officer corrected a witness after she told him that she heard the teen cry for help.
The officer told the witness, a long-time teacher, it was Zimmerman who cried for help, said the witness. ABC News has spoken to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her when she said she heard the teenager shout for help.
Source
Moron
hrmm sounds familiar.
This is why people who get paid to write stuff on the Internet are smarter than you.
From the story itself:
You see, the smart person knew enough to follow up the "sounds familiar" bit with some more information. You? You just gave us dead space.
Double post - the only one on this thread - noted.
Bupkis.
The Sanford PD and the DA had already written this off as your average self defense, and were not going to do ANYTHING. If the parents had not brought the case to the attention of the national media, Zimmerman would never have got another moment's scrutiny.
Until he did it again.
hmmmm, how longs has it been Trayvons shooting?
But then, your every post has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a moron, so at least it doesn't surprise me.
The police had this witness statement the night of the incident, so it's not a month after, the media didn't find out about it for a month but the police had it the whole time. It's not the medias job to question witness to crimes, that would be the investigators job not the damn media.
I am still curious why(they have)you thought the police could tell that the bullet lodged in Trayvons chest came from the gun Zimmerman said by just looking?
No one leaked this witness he did a interview 2 days after the incident.
Because Zimmerman admitted to shooting Martin with that gun.
What fascinates me about this case is how clear-cut it is, how it should legally play out, thus how much twisting, distorting, mangling, and convoluting has to be done in order to switch the guilty with the innocent to sway the public consensus.
Whatever degrees hi has or doesn't have, auditioning for defense attorney in a comments forum is no way to recoup your lost sanity.
But I guess that you, with your "masters degree" from some university you can't remember, know far more about this case than the guy in charge of it.
But maybe it was another weapon that wasn't registered that he shot with? Just maybe he was hiding something. Maybe,just maybe some investigation. But alas all your reasons why they didn't take his weapon falls flat because they did. Could it be they did want to check? lol.
'Because Zimmerman admitted to shooting Martin with that gun.'
So its supposed to be a fact because "he said so"!?That's not police work.It should have been determined by ballistics testing and testing Zimmerman's hands for gunpowder resdidue.What if Zimmerman was covering for someone else knowing his neighborhood watch status,the stand your ground law,and his relationship with the police Dept (not to mention being a judge's son) would likely"save" him.I don't think he is covering for anyone,but shouldn't these basic tests be done to rule it out AND verify that part of Zimmerman's story.Isn't that what police work is supposed to do!?
Why not, I wonder.
I'll tell you what. Leave out the part where you are too stupid to learn to spell, let alone attend college.
Just address the fact that the cops tried to influence testimony at the scene. And then, a month later, mysteriously come up with a "witness" that agrees with Zimmerman against all the other witnesses.
I gotta say.
If I am walking back from the store and I notice a vehicle slowly following me, then I notice the driver get out and start chasing me, I guarantee you that I will attack him as soon as he catches up to me.
I seriously doubt that Martin did. From what his girlfriend says, he was attempting to get away from the man, and thought, at one point, that he had succeeded.
However, in light of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, Trayvon Martin would have been WELL within his rights to have attacked Zimmerman. At the point that Zimmerman caught up to him, Martin SHOULD have feared for his life, and probably should have as soon as Zimmerman exited his vehicle and began to pursue him.
We can all surmise how differently this story would be being reported if there HAD actually been a scuffle and Martin had managed to wrestle the murder weapon away from Zimmerman, or if the gun had gone off and killed Zimmerman.
You think Fox and Hate Radio are smearing Martin now?
BTW, that photo of the kid flipping the bird with the droopy drawers- very typical of the Facebook and phone-pics I've seen from a lot of my friends' white, suburban kids of the same age.
Yes, yes it would, because they're more interested in playing to prejudices than in seeing justice done.
Apparently the Forida law only applies to the person who survives such an encounter. I would say this case has a serious problem in that regard.
He has too much melanin.
And worth mentioning too that the Twitchy story was sourced from Brooks Bayne - widely mocked by conservatives, among other reasons for being the brains behind this Stormfront-friendly attack on Sandra Fluke.
That's basically all they have. A couple of, let's be kind, melanin-skeptics plus Geraldo Rivera trying to argue that Trayvon Martin had it coming.
You'd have thought they'd be sensible enough to take a cue from one of their heroes, Allen West, but they are too evil and stupid even to manage this.
Would it really matter? Is the sentence for a teenager who smokes weed now a sudden, violent, vigilante style execution?
How could Zimmerman have even known about Martin's unfortunate, but fairly common teenage problems? How can they rationalize that as a justification for murder?
it's a big fat lie.
he needs to confess to this racially motivated murder, and turn himself in.
In one of the 911 tapes, you can clearly hear Martin calling for help, and then there is an unmistakable firearm report and an immediate cessation of the calls for help.
Fairly sure this would be a national story if it had the races involved been reversed.
He'll recover.
Trayvon Martin is dead.
What is that draws a guy like you to false equivalence arguments?
For the SECOND TIME: in how many of those cases is the person responsible just standing there and never gets arrested or charged?
You are aware that a person has to be arrested and charged before they can be put on trial, yes?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.
I didn't know that they started selling those out of the back of Rolling Stone.
Yeah, I remember it. Not entirely sure what it has to do with anything, other than your "White men are so, so victimized" whine. Hey, everybody here owes me ten bucks if/when highliter mentions Tawana Brawley. At the rate he's going, he'll probably be on "but how come THEY'RE allowed to say it?" by mid-afternoon.
And the Duke incident? Seriously? Another false equivalence?
The kids maintained were innocent and they were exonerated
Zimmerman admits to the shoot, and, at this point, has been charged with nothing.
Zimmerman was the intruder . . . he had no business in the gated community where he killed this boy. The boy was the invitee on the property, not Zimmerman. He didn't even live there. He FOLLOWED this kid and murdered him.
Where are you getting that?
Do try to keep up.
This story has so many different versions, it's hard to know what's true or false.
That's what I've been saying, people want mob justice. Let the system work. Too many people who don't even know how the system work are trying to judge it with unconfirmed information put out by the media.
And yes I know Zimmerman appointed himself. That's one of the reasons I figured the story you heard was probably wrong. Why would he be a neighborhood captain appointed or not for a neighborhood he doesn't live in.
There are, as I said in my other post, too many versions of this story floating around to know what's true or false.
Also, members of that neighborhood watch said that Zimmerman attended their last meeting (I can't remember the time between that and killing) and several claimed that at that meeting, Zimmerman didn't say or doing anything that caused them to be concerned about him.
Also, they allowed Zimmerman to be their NHW captain, knowing he had not taken the NHW training offered by the Sheriffs Office.
And that NHW were holding meetings, and apparently appointing "captains" etc. but they were not registered with the National NHW association. According to Chris Talkie, director of the NHWA for the National Sheriffs Association.
Tulko, also made a public statement that "Zimmerman broke cardinal rules."
To update my post Standford Police Chief Bill Lee attended an emergency NHW meeting, requested by another resident in that neighborhood regarding Zimmerman's aggressive behavior and run ins with him.
Zimmerman's neighbors complained about aggressive tactics before Martin's death.
colorlines.com also have a very informative article, dated 3/19/2012
Stop digging you berk, you're getting sillier and sillier.
Of course, that's more than what the authorities overseeing this matter has done. Zimmerman was admittedly the stalking Martin, and admittedly shot him. And he, of course, has been charged with nothing.
That's where your false equivalency comes into play. Not because of race, but because of the nature and circumstances of the acts. One child burned. One child shot. One child recovering. One child dead. Two assailants unknown and being sought. One assailant known and released.
Get it?
Yep and according to the DOJ 94% of black homicides are committed by other blacks.
If anyone actually cared about you, they'd keep you away from a keyboard and an internet connection.
Seriously, your trolling is usually at least a little entertaining, but this time it's just stupid.
That on top of a wrongful death suit against Zimmerman to bankrupt the creep.
I can't tell you how frustrating it is for middle-aged (or older) white guys like me to try to explain racial issues to non-whites, and see all of our wisdom and insight go in one ear and out the other.
It's as if you think you know better than us. And that's not very respectful.
Please don't EVER pretend that you have a master's degree in anything again.
Newsflash, idiot: "snitching" can get you killed.
In spite of this, "they" ARE focusing on the "no snitching crap in their communities."
Note the date on that second story: 1/22/2008. That means you've been ignorant on the subject for a minimum of 4 years, though of course we all know it's actually been much, much longer.
Iraqi Muslim woman dies after beating in California home, left with hateful note
Your text to link here...
She and Trayvon were killed due to stereotypes and hate they aren't juxtaposed against each other. Whites under attack? Amazing!
Click out of your crush videos long enough to Google "false equivalency" and get back to us, 'kay? Maybe then, together, we can figure out how to solve the problems of the poor, oppressed white people.
Because the librul media hates white people, obviously. That's why there are hardly any white anchors.
Interesting that having gasoline poured on you and then set aflame would result in such minor injuries. I am not arguing that the boy and his family fabricated the story, but who knows.
Anyone remember Ashley Todd?
As opposed to Zimmerman apologists like yourself, who are screaming that this was what Martin deserved.
No offense, stupid, but his black assailants are being investigated for hate crimes and will be arrested and charged for the attack. Zimmerman? He not only was not arrested, he was allowed to keep the gun that he murdered this young man who did NOTHING. Do you see the difference here?
Hate crimes are hate crimes and they are disgusting, no matter who the perpetrator is.
Nice talking points parroting, highliter, but, as usual, you're about two weeks too late.
Not mentioned was WHEN the gun was siezed. He still has his license to carry and with it, by Florida law, can legally buy another without a waiting period.
I did some research last night and found a few-days-old local news station video on their interview with the witness.
From the transcript of the news segment.
Adding a note of confusion was the online copy of the police report.
In the "offenses section" of police report it reads as:
Homicide-negligent manslaughter-unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act.
I have a feeling this call will not be found or released.
Could it be "walking in a gated community while black"?
How did you hear about this unreported story?
Remember that video of a black SEIU member in a mild shoving match ( unclear even who fell down)? That was in the media for weeks as a 'violent union thug attack".
And those New Black Panthers, a couple of guys with sticks standing outside a polling booth, who didn't touch anybody? The righties are still screaming about this outrageous crime.
How F-ing delusional does one have to be to imagine that, if Zimmerman was black and Martin was white, this wouldn't be a story ? Talk about your willful ignorance.
white murdered by black
white couple murdered by blacks
white people murdered by blacks
Still keeping it stupid, I see.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Tape+of+Black+misssissippi+murdered+by+teens+in+truck&view=detail&mid=52D139D5A71252FC49C852D139D5A71252FC49C8&first=0&qpvt=Tape+of+Black+misssissippi+murdered+by+teens+in+truck
Worse, you probably gave highliter a stiffy with that video.
I know, right!?
And while we're at it, doesn't it just bug the hell out of you that they get to call each other n**ger, but when you do it, they get all uppity and s**t??
/snark off
Seriously, highliter, are you trying to sound like a whiny racist? Because you're "why is it...?" line of reasoning is exactly what one finds at places like Stormfront and other white nationalist discussion forums.
So, if you are a racist, go f**k yourself. If you honestly aren't a racist, you should seriously consider educating yourself so you stop sounding like one. I'd suggest stop repeating the racist line of questioning and reasoning you're picking up on right wing blogs.
If you had never posted another single thought on this site, this one would automatically place you in the never-to-be-taken-seriously category.
Congratulations, nutbag!
Just imagine if Trayvon had managed to wrestle the gun away or if the gun had gone off and killed Zimmerman.
Martin would have gone to jail, right then, and he would still be there. Self defense be damned.
I'm not sure why present-day conservatives think that enriching the rich more and impoverishing the poor more and decimating the middle class are good deeds or make sense.
I fail to see how conservative means being racist, xenophobic, jingoistic and misogynistic.
Yet that is what conservatives have become: a caricature.
And can someone explain how all these evangelical Christian conservatives can worship Ayn Rand?
As a former conservative who isn't a "liberal" because society says I'm "conservative" because of my moral beliefs (which I don't think anyone else should be forced to follow, such as not being in favor of abortion, etc., unless a mother's life is threatened, or rape, incest, etc.).
The tragic issue of Trevon's homicide (I believe a jury will render a second-degree murder conviction, if it ever goes to trial, and murder is a verdict rendered by a jury, not the press) shows what is wrong with present-day conservatives: conservative ranks have been infected and afflicted with many nutbags who are racist, xenophobic, jingoistic and misogynistic.
From a former conservative without an identity and a former conservative who doesn't hate liberals simply for having some different opinions.
Thank FOX News for this.
They seem to have been instructed to never give an inch on the media landscape. They simply can't admit that this was a tragic event for the family and community where it happened. They simply can't grant us that in this one specific case, the "stand your ground" laws may have been misused.
The modern conservative movement has been marked by this rigid, top-down inflexibility. They have an agenda bought and paid for, and something as trivial as facts or a tragic murder will not make a difference.
Even the election of an African-American President has not removed the stain of racism from the nation. In my opinion it will never be excised from the national psyche until the passive racists who make up much of the "Conservative" commentariat stop pretending that they are not racist and are recognised for what they are. Maybe then some of those whose benign racism is more a consequence of ignorance will wake up to themselves. Maybe.
Sure as eggs, the modern-day U.S. is paying for the sins of those guys back at the end of the 18th Century and until the matter is dealt with definitively the U.S. will continue to be defined by racism.
Chickens coming home to roost? Rev Wright, is that you? =>
PS: "Twitchy" is an astonishly dumb name.
Not at all. My name is Phil. Does that help?
Hang around and most of us will eventually clue you in on our real names.
Well, not the "conservatives", they do seem to be shy of that. Of course, given the nature of their postings, I can't really say as I blame them for not using their real names. Especially if you go to something like foxnews.com or theblaze.com . If you think they post hateful stuff here, you should go to one of those sites. Though, I would recommend wearing a full hazmat suit. And have a barf bag handy.
If I was inclined, I could find out. Which is why my real name isn't here. Mike is as far as you will get. How many Mikes do you reckon there are in the USA?