Jump to content

Trayvon Martin Killing


Eric83

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I just read an article that George Zimmerman's defense is obtaining access to Trayvon Martin's twitter and facebook to see if he had violent tendencies (because a status or tweet will prove what happened that night :rolleyes: ) It made me realize the case wasn't discussed here.

What are you guys' opinion?

I feel Zimmerman racially profiled him but didn't mean to kill him. He needs to go to prison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 291
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I disagree with putting a victim on trial. If the defense is that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor then it makes sense that they would try to gather evidence that would enable them to paint him in a negative light. I don't agree with it but the system is more the problem. My contention is that whatever took place after George Zimmerman left his car is completely his responsibility and even if his version of events is true then he still bears the responsibility of setting the chain of events in motion. He should serve a prison sentence no matter what.

IA with you that I don't think he meant to kill him but I don't think he racially profiled him. I think he was overzealous and went way too far. The un-doctored 9-1-1 tape indicates that he was initially unsure of race and that the operator first brought it up. I don't believe that if you see someone from a distance at night and his head is covered by a hood that your first thought is that he must be a black crook and I'm going to kill him. I'm not saying it is impossible but it's improbable and highly illogical.

The major issue is the law. The Sanford Police Department may have failed to arrest George Zimmerman because of the race of the victim--that's for the Justice Department to investigate and determine.

It's too bad that so much time was devoted to debating the dangers of hoodies instead of focusing on the Stand Your Ground Laws and how they are interpreted.

If wearing hoodies is such a threat and danger to one segment of the population then why not devote as much or not more energy to getting rid of them as wad devoted to protesting the Adidas "shackle" shoe or the $300 plus LeBron James Nike shoe? Not wearing hoodies should save lots of lives right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I still say the 911 operators need to be better trained. Her statement to Zimmerman "We don't need you to do that" when he told her he was going after him was basically a REQUEST. The 911 operator needed to be firm and clear. She needed to use the word NO. Tell him "No, do not pursue". The reality is both sides are at fault, and both men did things that were fool hardy and contributed to the tragedy that happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't know if this is true because I don't know what Trayvon Martin did, if anything, to contribute to the situation. I cannot take George Zimmerman's account at face value since he's trying to save himself by shifting blame on someone who has no voice thanks to his zeal. He wasn't violating any laws and it's disturbing to know that you can be walking along, minding your own business and be forced to take responsibility for someone coming along and pursuing you just because of their own hangups. Then you're dead and he's looking for sympathy.

Using the media to paint Trayvon Martin as this drug using thug may be a smart defensive move because there are plenty of people out there who see that as justification for killing a kid who was walking home.

As far as I am concerned, George Zimmerman starts out with at least 75% of the blame which increases depending on what anyone believes happened. If he did try to leave and was accosted then it stays the same but it never decreases and it might just be 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Damn right. I am so sick of the people who try to claim this false equivalence to lessen George Zimmerman's responsibility for killing Trayvon. A grown man with a gun who pursues a teenage boy with a drink and skittles minding his own business is solely at fault for the resulting death, period. Zimmerman will probably get off, but his ass belongs in prison for a good long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If he gets off then the civil case will wipe him out for the rest of his life. Once that happens Zimmerman will pretty much come apart at the seams. His live will be hell either way.

Personally, given his mental and emotional instability, I pretty much expect he'll meltdown before he even goes to trial, resulting in his being found unfit for trial or he'll kill himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

By no means did Trayvon bear equal responsibility, but he does bear SOME for being foolish and making a ton of mistakes, such as:

1: Dressing like a criminal

2: jumping the fence in a gated community dressed is aforementioned attire (His FATHER lived there, most likley nothing would have happened had Trayvon opened the gate with the code.)

3: Confronting the loose cannon with agression instead of calmly explaining who he was and where he was going... and I'm sure he could have just CALLED his father on the spot to prove it.

It's just a matter of a dumb teenager doing dumb crap (Which happens all the time with teenagers of EVERY race) at the wrong place at the wrong time. Teenagers tend to have this feeling of invincibility that gets them into trouble sometimes. But It's not as simplistic as you guys are making it sound, there were a wide array of factors at work that night, and if even ONE of them was not in play, then it would not have ended tragically. And the biggest factor, as I said before... a homeowner's assocation using neighborhood watch people to perform security because they are too damn cheap to pay for a trained professional, that was the root cause of this entire event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

  • He didn't dress like a "criminal." He dressed like millions of other perfectly respectable people dress.
  • Whether he jumped the gate or not, he was doing nothing wrong when Zimmerman attacked him. He was the invited guest of someone who lived there. People in a gated community should be able to invite friends and family over without having to worry that the nutcase with a Stallone complex will gun them down.
  • George Zimmerman was a stranger who accosted him in the middle of the night. Martin had every reason to feel threatened. He had no responsibility to be nice to a strange unstable man following him.

The only person who did anything wrong was George Zimmerman. He went out that night with a gun specifically looking to cause violence and that's exactly what he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No, he didn't need to be "nice", he simply needed to be civil and calm. When someone comes up to you and looks to be unhinged the last thing you do is get all confrontational and throw gasoline on the fire. It's just a lack of common sense, that's all.

And yes, he was dressed like a criminal. Just because respectable people wear the attire, doesn't change what it is. I can go out in a chiffon gown and just because I'm wearing it, that doesn't make it man's clothing. And the jumping of the fence was his BIGGEST mistake. the fence is there for a reason, because the people who live inside are scared and paranoid. So if your appearance makes people nervous, it makes sense not to tempt fate and do things that will make people suspicious. Because when someone jumps a fence, that says to anyone watching that they don't HAVE the gate code, therefore they are not SUPPOSED to be there. So yes, Zimmerman TOTALLY did the wrong thing, and is an unhstable loose cannon (and should go to jail for manslaughter). But Trayvon is also dumb as a box of rocks for lighting that cannon's fuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I feel as though I've heard this story a million times but somehow I was asleep when the part about his possibly jumping the fence was mentioned. If he did jump the fence then that does fall under suspicious behavior. Logic dictates that anyone who has a right to be in a place with a fence would walk through the gate not jump over it. I would be curious too if I saw someone hop a fence to get into an area where I lived.

I don't believe that a hoodie is criminal attire. The mind might go there because it seems that people holding up stores occasionally have hoods over their heads. It was drizzling and it's normal to cover one's head in wet weather. Would it really have made a difference if he had on a suit and jumped the fence? I don't think so.

As far as his answering any questions go, I don't know that I would want some guy approaching me and asking me questions and that I would feel obligated in any way to answer those questions--especially if I felt I shouldn't talk to strangers. I would try to get as far away from his as fast as possible. It might sound reasonable for someone to say that all he had to do was answer but if you put yourself in those shoes you might see it differently. And who's to say that George Zimmerman would have believed him/been satisfied with his response?

If he did jump over the fence and arouse George Zinnmerman's suspicions then informing the police should have been sufficient. There was nothing to be gained by following him except the potential for creating a situation which is what ultimately happened and ended in his killing someone. He could have avoided all of that had he stayed in his car and left it alone. He was not being threatened at the time and this law that allows individuals to go and provoke others and then claim self defense when they kill the person(s) they provoked is terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's not, unless it's worn in combination with pants on the ground, which he was wearing that night. It comes down to the fact that youth of all races have adopted the dress of the criminal element because they think it to be "cool", and that is something that didn't happen 20 years ago, 30, or 40 years ago. One thing I want to know is why is it not falling out of fashion, in the normal cycle of fashion trends? Are kids going to be wearing this crap 75 years from now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's about the same logic used against rape victims, "well, she had on tight clothes, so she brought it on herself". It's wrong and it shouldn't be used,

The bottom line is, if Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his car, there would have been no shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I get what you're saying but I personally see sagging pants as unkempt not criminal. If a guy wears a bandana, white tank shirt, has tatoos over both arms, and sagging khaki pants, should I assume he's a gang member and blame him for not understanding if I see him as one even though he's not?

I think we've gotten used to society telling us what how we should see people based on a bunch of criteria that really just stereotypes and pigeon holes people.

Blaming clothing takes the responsibility away from adults to make responsible decisions when interacting with others. I'm not going to give anyone a free pass by saying that "criminal" attire is instrumental in a kid being killed any more than I would give people slack for implying that a mini skirt prompted a rapist's actions.

The same reason some are okay with giving the hoodie some portion of blame for a death is the about the same reason the unkempt pants on the ground persists. No one or not enough people challenge these things and we mainly shrug and say "what can you do?" I'm sure concerned parents can try to do a lot more than shrug "oh well" and I'm sure some of them do and the ones that succeed probably don't have their kids waking around in their presence with their sagging pants on.

People will probably find this harsh but this is what needs to happen when kids try to leave the house in inappropriate clothing:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iwo338Ezcjo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • This late 1976 stuff doesn't sound as bad as it has in other versions I've read (weekly recaps from Jon-Michael Reed and SOD synopses). I am surprised that there is a variation of Ian - Meg - Arlene - Tom playing out this late in the game, but it doesn't sound half bad. Ian's involvement with Beaver Ridge and how it impacts Rick and Cal's future also intrigued me  more than I expected. Even the Carrie - Betsy connection having Carrie watch Suzanne while Ben is visiting was a nice surprise. I feel like this all falls apart pretty quickly with the arrival of Mia Marriott, Michael Blake, and a slew of other half baked characters under Upton.  
    • Too bad she ended up on Y&R. Actress Valarie Pettiford might've been "Sharon" because she sings too and does it pretty well.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • @NothinButAttitude thanks for sharing the rough draft. I had bought "Shadows on the Wall" from Kathryn Leigh Scott's website probably 20+ years ago. It's a fascinating read into a very different version of what the show could have been. 
    • @Efulton That's the quote I was refering to. In the bible, at almost the beginning, Rueben and C.C. were compared as being similar as two fathers wanting everything for their children, or something along those lines. I do think the Andrades were intended to have more of a role, but they never even garnered a family set (just Santana's apartment). In 1991, they added the Capwell kitchen which seemed to be a domestic space for Rosa, but clearly not solely Rosa's. I feel like I remember Rosa confronting Santana about her feelings for C.C. being an attempt to recreate her grand fantasy with Channing, Jr. in the kitchen, but more likely that was the bedroom Santana was redecorating (C.C.'s master suite) utilizing the designsshe had envisioned for herself and Channing, Jr.  
    • On the French Santa Barbara site Ismael Carlo did not hold back about how he felt about the Dobsons. http://santabarbara-online.com/index2.htm How did you start in Santa Barbara ? My recollection is that I auditioned for the role. After a couple of weeks of contract negotiations I was told that all was in order and that I would start work in a couple of weeks or so. But that's when the sh*t hit the fan. In her high petulant way she (Bridget Dobson) commenced to tell me how all her South American workers were beholding to her. How she treated them, "like children". I said to her, "I'm not a child". She got upset and started to cry. I told her that if she did not want me on the show, all she had to do was break the contract and pay me. It never happened. The Dobsons, who were the producers, where a pair of what you would call in your country aristocrats in their minds. I almost quit just before I started. But like any actor at the time I stuck it out all because of the work. I don't think I will ever sell my soul again. I was also able to perform with the lead actor and director in a production of his: Romeo & Juliet. I played Papa Capulet.
    • It's kismet – I was just thinking about Azure C the other day and revisited some of the press from that era. Reading it now, it’s undeniably cringeworthy how often the articles emphasized that the actress was a cisgender woman. It wasn’t framed as a critique of The City for not casting a trans actress—it felt more like a reassurance to viewers that, yes, the storyline involved transgender themes, but they weren’t actually going to show anything. ABC ran an ad in TV Guide that teased that Azure would confess her past – that she “was once a he” – to her love interest Bernardo (similar to the onscreen headline in their tabloid). Rather than focusing on thoughtful representation, the press framed the twist as a dramatic surprise for audiences, to capitalize on shock value.  It was clearly not treated like other social issues had been on ABC Daytime.  They were usually more respectful, and pedantic toward the audience, where this was just about revealing a secret. Of course, the irony is that the only actual protests came from GLAAD over ABC's ignorance, rather than anyone from the right, as they had feared.
    • Having seen what Long did with Mason and Julia on SB, I can't see Long ever being able to write a fun/lightweight story for Nola and Quint. 
    • The Azure C. plot is during the early days of "The City" when it still is, quite frankly, not very good. And when it gets better, there is still such a hostile quality to material than even enjoyable material like the Gino/Tracey engagement party lacks the humanity it should.  Something that I don't think is mentioned much, and I feel is noteable is that the sex scene between Azure and Bernardo is played as the climax to a long romantic build up complete with a musical montage to the Eagles' "Love Will Keep Us Alive." Bernardo's reaction is absolutely awful, but I think the reveal was meant as a stumbling block to their relationship. I'm not sure exactly where they would have gone with them, but I would have had Azure accused of being Jared Chase's murderer because he was involved in outing her (Malcolm may have as well). I would have used this to reunite Azure and Bernardo, who believed in her innocence. It may have played too closely to the trope that trans people are deviants so I would have made sure it was clearly that she was being falsely accused.  For your research, Tony Cardello (an offscreen character) was the gay son of a mob boss, Vince Cardello, on the CBN serial "Another Life." He's referenced as gay in a couple episodes in early December 1981. The references are very negative. In the summer of 1982, Tony is said to be arriving soon with his mother Louise, but they never materialize as there is a change in writers. 
    • I've always considered that Paul Avila Mayer was hired by Ellen on her way out the door, but I also wondered if NBC was trying to keep Mayer in their writers' stable after he failed to work out on "Santa Barbara."  Mayer and Braxton were fined for writing during the strike. I believe there is an article mentioning it somewhere in this thread.  I don't hate Mayer and Braxton's run. I found Jeanne Glynn's run very dry in what I've seen until about her final month or so when she starts to focus on the reveal that T.R. is the lost Rebecca Kendall. Mayer and Braxton didn't always have amazing stories, but I found the characterization was deeper (if not always true to who the person had been). There were some scenes I really enjoyed.  The misogyny comment is interesting and is something I hadn't considered. I found the tail end of Braxton and Mayer's run interesting when the all male board at Tourneur Instruments gave Liza grief for shacking up with Hogan, which seemed to be broaching the subject in a way that showed it was wrong. I will say, however, there is a scene much earlier in their run where Liza starts to think of herself as aging because of having a teenage daughter that now makes me lean to agree with you.  I thought Liza and Hogan had nice chemistry and I loved the fact that Hogan was clearly more into Liza than Liza was into Hogan. Sunny's fate in that story was awful. Sunny rarely had good stories once Hogan left the first time.  Bassett played Selina McCulla, a nurse who worked at the Riverfront Clinic. Her brother was Joseph Phillips' Cruiser McCulla, who was Ryder's pal. They were introduced in early 1985 by Jeanne Glynn and written out very quickly in Braxton and Mayer's run. Cruiser got a formal write out; he was sent off to study computers out of town. Selina appeared at the clinic in some situation after Cruiser left and then was never seen or mentioned again.  I want to say they sent TR off to college, but a later post says she went to Switzerland. I think Krakowski was in some play at the time. Maybe it was Starlight Express. The chemistry is still there for me in October, 1985, when Hogan and Sunny are investigating the poisoned water storyline that dovetails back into Hogan / Liza / Lloyd.  I am a Gary Tomlin apologist but his second run is frenetic, not always in a good way.  Evie was probably going to be revealed to be someone's daughter. Stone was her stepfather, wasn't he? I don't think introducing a younger female from the lower class was a bad idea, but I don't know if I would have gone with Evie / Quinn. I was briefly intrigued by the chemistry test between Adair and Ryder.  I don't mind Jeffrey Meek, but I find him very attractive so maybe I am biased in my appreciation of his work.  I definitely felt the Kendall reset in October with Chase going to the paper and the mystery of San Marcos leading to Estelle and the return of Steve. I don't like Lloyd Bautista much as an actor, but he would have been better off playing Martin Tourneur by that point but not as a crime boss. When does John Whitsell takeover? Is it November? When I watched these episodes a few years back, October, November, and December seemed like almost three different shows. November was a glaring jump from the material Tomlin started to set up in October and by December it seemed like everything from October was gone.  Stephanie / Wendy / Bela is a horrid story. I thought the initial concept of the story was smart (Wendy trying to prove that Bela was a cad by luring him into bed but I couldn't see Wendy actually falling for Bela). The only direction I would have accepted was a Stephanie / Wendy / Bela story that ended with both women murdering Bela and getting away with it.  I didn't know they had already set up Liza's exit. Thanks for sharing a new detail. I struggle to watch the November-December 1986 episodes when they are online. It just seems like such a different show. I don't think the decision about T.R. was that noble. I think it was clear that Jane Krakowski wasn't staying and Robert Reed as Lloyd wasn't going to work out.  I think the show wanted to go full steam ahead with Evie / Cagney and Suzi was considered expendable.  Tomlin was writer for both Sarah's death and Patti's arrival. I don't know if the producer change had happened yet or which producer approved those decisions. I'm pretty sure Nicholson was out in November at some point. Sarah's death is the impetus for Patti's return; she comes back to Henderson to find her daughter's murderer.  I think details get lost to history. For years, Tracey's existence was never mentioned on soap opera message boards when I first started. Interesting, Sarah Whiting was also rarely mentioned and I am not sure Michelle Joyner is listed in cast lists for most of the soap books that cover the final years of "Search for Tomorrow." I cannot remember if Tracey was mentioned from the beginning. I know she is mentioned by July, 1985, when Sarah is at the McCleary family dinner. I think Kate asks Sarah about her family and she mentions her sister and brother.  I think Sarah's adoption was mentioned only under Tomlin, but I might be wrong on that. I feel like it was stated by Jo in explaining to Suzi (or maybe someone else) about why Sarah had a constant need for approval.  Lundquist didn't work for me as Steve, but I was disappointed how quickly Steve was dumped a second time.  I have never understood why the show dropped Phillip Brown as Steve or why there wasn't an immediate recast given the importance of the character to the narrative. Clearly, it was a Ellen Barrett issue because Tomlin brings Steve back less than two months into his 1985 return.  I think the shift to the twins, Chase and Alec, was probably to skew the show younger and keep Lloyd involved as there was part two of the Kendall vs. Tourneur/Sentell story to play out with Travis and Liza raising a Kendall. Originally, from what I've pieces together, it looked like Adair was the mother of Elan and one of the Kendall boys was the father. I wonder what this meant was the plan for T.R. or if she and Elan were both intended to be Kendalls, which would have been overkill.   I agree that the deconstruction of the Wendy / Quinn / Sarah story was a mistake. I think Tomlin leaned into one of his favorite tropes (turning the uninspired heroine into the bad girl) and used it with Sarah, though it seemed like Mayer and Braxton may have already been heading in that direction. I didn't love the music angle of the story all that much, but I loved that it pitted Quinn against Chase and I would have enjoyed that rivalry a bit more. When did Quinn become Stephanie's assistant? Was that under Tomlin? I thought that was a smart move.  I think Stephanie/Wendy/Bela is one of the worst story choices. When Stephanie called Wendy a slut, I was like we've reached a point where I no longer recognize anyone involved.  The Suzi / Wendy stuff falls apart very early in Mayer / Braxton as I think Jeanne Glynn was gearing up for a longer Wendy / Suzi custody suit over Jonah as Suzi's mental health continued to collapse. I felt Braxton and Mayer even hinted that they might go with Wendy pursuing Cagney for a moment, but instead we got Wendy / Quinn / Sarah, which I really liked. I felt Sarah being the Jo's granddaughter and a manipulator against Wendy's more mature and adult complicated heroine was an interesting choice that should have been allowed to play longer.  I felt that Jeanne Glynn built a lot of potential, but never really lit the match and was able to use it in stories. That may be because she didn't have enough time. I felt her last month or so was very solid and was finally going somewhere after mostly not going anywhere. Justine's departure didn't bother me. They had played a lot of Justine / Chase as well and Wendy / Alec. There was a lot of building of foundation, but the story never got anywhere.  The shifts in story are remarkable and depressing to consider. Lots of the potential was intriguing, it just rarely reached a productive stage because, as you have said, a writer or a producer was always coming in and making their mark. 
    • Just had a random thought that Vanessa Bell Calloway would be good casting for Sharon (The Articulette who hung up on Anita). She usually plays nice, but if you saw the Temptations biopic you'll remember she was pretty good playing that crooked manager that ripped them off. She might also sing because in Polly and Polly Comin' Home her character sang but I can't tell if it was a dub or not. Lastly, she did AMC and DAYS for short stints so she is no stranger to soaps.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy