Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

The Trayvon Travesty

20 Comments

The preferred media narrative has completely collapsed:

It is impossible to reasonably argue that the state presented a case that should result in a murder 2 or manslaughter conviction. However, and of course, a conviction is still possible.

So they’ll continue to unreasonably argue it.

[Update a couple minutes later]

The Zimmerman trial as media pornography.

It’s certainly a distraction from real issues.

20 thoughts on “The Trayvon Travesty”

  1. It’s hard to see how the left can win this one, when it involves an artificial conflict they’ve created, setting one of their special interest groups against another of their special interest groups. I guess they’re hoping they can pretend Zimmerman was actually guilty but was released by a biased jury of EVIL RACISS.

  2. Forget the media. Forget the racial-grievance attorneys.

    Early on, I was asked for my opinions on this case. By someone living in South Florida. By a Harvard University graduate. In a STEM major. Who graduated with honors.

    I offered the view that whatever events lead up to the shooting, at the moment Mr. Zimmerman drew his gun, he was “getting stomped”, of which my respondent was enough of a “techie hipster” to know was slang for being subject to a severe, potentially life threatening or brain-damage inducing beating.

    The response at the time was that I get too much of my news from places (such as Rand’s Web page), that the facts weren’t known and I was not to rush to judgement, and that a person making conclusions as I had could “end up with egg on your face.”

    In the manner that in the Near Eastern land where Great Grandfather came from that a man looking “the wrong way” at a woman could be taken as exoneration on justifiable homicide, it seems that Dr. de la Rionda is promulgating a legal theory that a cross-eyed look at a person of a minority race by someone of mixed racial heritage constitutes a predicate for the malice required for a Murder 2 conviction. Let’s set aside for now the many ways in which we are down the road towards those unfortunate “low trust tribal societies” where everyone is siloed into their religious-ethnic-language grouping.

    Is there anyone, anyone without the hardest preconceived view or personal stake in the outcome, who thinks differently than at the time of the shooting, Mr. Zimmerman was on his back on the ground, Mr. Martin was above him where “above” is in relation to the vector direction of the local gravitational acceleration vector, and that Mr. Martin was in contact with Mr. Zimmerman so as to effect the inelastic collision of Mr. Zimmermans head with the ground below? Anyone?

    Well yes, I surmise someone will respond to my post to gently correct me, that there is doubt regarding the scenario I have outlined, leaving aside that the burden of proof is with Mr. de la Rionda of the head shaking no. OK, does anyone, anyone believe that there is conclusive proof that Mr. Martin was on the bottom in that altercation? Anyone.

    I’ll tell you what troubles me. Not the media as they are panderers and not very bright as they never made it into a “real job.” Not the racial-grievance attorneys because from my own family heritage and from the accounts from events in the past and over the ocean I can understand what being of a minority entails.

    What troubles me is that a Harvard-educated hard-sciences several-sigma-on-the-right-of-the-bell-curve person living in South Florida is not out there in the streets screaming about this injustice. What troubles me is that a Harvard-educated hard-sciences several-sigma-on-the-right-of-the-bell-curve person in South Florida doesn’t seem to be much bothered by any of this.

    And before any of our fine commentators “lay into” me for my ignorance and my latent racial prejudice, you are talking to a person who for the longest time believed that the LA Police were up to no good up to the point of laying the ground for reasonable doubt in the O.J. Simpson case. Maybe I have a strong pro-defendant’s presumption of innocence bias (your honor, I thought that O.J. was innocent — can I be excused from jury duty?), and the race of who is in the dock doesn’t matter to me.

    Go ahead, throw your best punch, beat me into the ground by pointing out my ignorance . . .

    1. According to Paul, you can walk up to a stranger on the street, tell them their mother is ugly, wait for the inevitable punch in the face, pull your gun, shoot them dead and walk away from the trial a free man.

      Not that I think Zimmerman did that, but that’s what you appear to be saying.

      1. According to Paul

        He never said anything like it. Has Trent decided that bob was wise in his method of debate, and therefore adopted it? If so, then I guess Trent did advocate killing a secretary just because she worked in a government building.

      2. Don’t you think that’s a bit disingenuous? Obviously if someone just punches you in the face because you provoked them with a taunt, you are not really justified in responding with much greater force.

        But in any civilized society, “ground and pound” is not a justifiable or proportionate response to a taunt, either. At best, a punch in the face is justifiable if someone is a real shit, and needs to be taught to behave respectfully. Trying to crack someone’s head open on the sidewalk is, no matter what the provocation, a disproportionate response to anything short of real physical violence.

        1. I grew up in a country town where “ground and pound” is exactly the right response to such a slight, that’s why I suggested it. One tooth and a black eye later you’ll learn to be civil.

          Obviously if someone just punches you in the face because you provoked them with a taunt, you are not really justified in responding with much greater force.

          This is completely not obvious to a great many people. “He threw the first punch” is as common a defense for adults as it is for twelve year olds. It is a widely accepted principle that he who strikes first is the aggressor, regardless of the taunt.

          Trying to crack someone’s head open on the sidewalk is, no matter what the provocation, a disproportionate response to anything short of real physical violence.

          Yes, I agree. I’d call that “getting out of hand”.

  3. “at the moment Mr. Zimmerman drew his gun, he was “getting stomped””
    Mr. Zimmerman’s account, supported by objective evidence. Unless the prosecution had proven otherwise, enough to support a self defense plea.

    But for low information people who listen to the major media for their news,

    – the bloodied back of his head and broken nose never happened.

    – Zimmerman is White, not a Hispanic of diverse ancestry. What is “White Hispanic”? Mostly Spanish/European ancestry via central America?

    – the “narrative” is how it happened.

    1. “But for low information people”

      Low information? Honors graduate from Harvard? In a STEM discipline?

      This has nothing to do with race, guns, self defense, or the criminal justice system. This has to do with red is green, up is down, broken is whole, wet is dry.

      Maybe Mr. Orwell was on to something, “War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.”

      2. I think low information people fall into at least three categories:

        1. Stupid, semi-literate ignoramuses

        2. Ordinary working class or middle class people with average education and intelligence who get their “news” from Jon Stewart and their political philosophy from their favorite celebrity

        3. Upper middle class people, often successful, highly intelligent and well-educated, who religiously read the New York Times and listen to NPR, but who reflexively dismiss any information found on ‘Faux News’ or conservative blogs

  4. Paul, I want you to know you used to be a tl;dr; but I’m starting to take the time. I certainly don’t always agree with you, but more often I do.

    Taking your comments in a bit of the order given; I don’t know who threw a first punch. I don’t know if Zimmerman pulled his weapon in advance, or if his cut came from Martin pushing Zimmerman off of him, while Martin yelled for help. What I do have is doubt, and it is very reasonable.

    Martin’s not alive to tell his story, but 3rd party witnesses, who have no care for Zimmerman are available. With the exception of Jeantal, all have suggested Zimmerman is honest about his story. At least one person claims to have eyewitnessed Martin on top of Zimmerman. And, as you offered Paul, “whatever events lead up to the shooting, at the moment Mr. Zimmerman drew his gun, he was “getting stomped”” That’s all the law seems to need for self-defense.

    Otherwise, I’m as troubled as you that intelligent people don’t see a man being railroaded into prison for a political cause.

  6. The problem with Paul’s friend is he is so intelligent and educated that he has no room left for wisdom.

    I know people like him, they simply can’t understand the explanation for many things does not have to be complex.

    1. I hear “money management” classes are completely different, with the biggest kids telling the noisy kids to shut up so the teacher can speak. History, literature, philosophy, this stuff is not exactly high priority learning in the ghetto. You’ll note the anonymous teacher even says as much:

      many non-whites are not receptive to education of any kind beyond the merest basics.

      Yes, history teachers do think learning to calculate marginal revenue product is “the merest basics”.

    2. YOUCH! That is a scathing indictment of black culture. I expect Trayvon went to a school like that.

      One quibble towards the end: “It is in the black man’s interest to have whites in Zimbabwe but he drives them out and starves.” It is in the interest of the people in Zimbabwe that there are people with education and attitudes of “white people”. A society needs people who can plan and organize, which apparently meant white people in Zimbabwe before they were thrown out. That happens when only a certain people are allowed to perform management for a couple generations.

      Black culture in America appeared on course to escape that fate until it got caught up in the welfare state.

  8. This is something new:

    Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained documents proving that the Department of Justice played a major behind-the-scenes role in organizing protests against George Zimmerman. Zimmerman is on trial for second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in February 2012.

    Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the DOJ on April 24, 2012. According to the documents JW received, a little-known DOJ unit called the Community Relations Service deployed to Sanford, FL, to organize and manage rallies against Zimmerman.

    Among JW’s findings:

    •March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being “deployed to Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”
    •March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”
    •March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.”
    •March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”
    •April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.”
    •April 11-12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.” – expenses for employees to travel, eat, sleep?

    JW says the documents it obtained reveal that CRS is not engaging in its stated mission of conducting “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution,” but instead engaged on the side of the anti-Zimmerman protesters.

    Justice wasn’t blind in this case. That’s what happens when you elect a community organizer president.

Comments are closed.