17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #33

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
cityslick said:
IMO, you can't put him in jail simply for that. I think that's what a lot of lawyers are saying about this case.
Click to expand...

Have you seen any commentary from lawyers (other than the Crump firm -- did I get the nomenclature right?) weigh in in favor of the prosecution? Just curious. I've seen Dershowitz, obviously, and the lawyer mentioned in that same article, but I don't think I've seen any weighing in on the other side.
 
Just K said:
My Opinion, Commentary, etc about the business of "News."
I think the owners of major media are playing a horrible game. To keep up their revenues they run with negative stories and then after the story either builds or dies down they go with the opposite side. They do this over and over again to keep the story alive. It is IMO, that today's media has nothing to do with ferreting out actual facts or truth. It is simply about making money and getting the most ratings.

Many people have just gotten so sick of it that they don't even watch or read the "news" anymore. IMO, that has led to people choosing to be unawares of the goings-on in their communities, nation and the world. That, IMO, is a dangerous thing.
Click to expand...

I see it as "we" are nothing to "them".
 
cityslick said:
GZ is also 11 years older than TM so it's not a fair comparison. It's not like we were seeing 11 year old pics of TM when he was 6 yrs old. GZ didn't look like the 2005 mug shot either.
Click to expand...

How is it not a fair comparison? It's a perfect comparison.

Exactly, we're not seeing 11 year old pictures of Trayvon, we only saw pics that were a few years old because Trayvon had just turned 17, yet they were attacked for that as if they were intentionally trying to hide something. I've said many times, it's not like Trayvon was 30 and they were showing pics from when he was a baby, he had just turned 17, they were only a few years old

And again, that's the point, Trayvon's family didn't have as many choices, GZ's family certainly had newer pictures of GZ, but they chose an 11 year old high school photo.

So I ask was it something sinister, or maybe simply that photo was special to them, or maybe that photo was a photo they had handy?

JMHO
 
Just K said:
My Opinion, Commentary, etc about the business of "News."
I think the owners of major media are playing a horrible game. To keep up their revenues they run with negative stories and then after the story either builds or dies down they go with the opposite side. They do this over and over again to keep the story alive. It is IMO, that today's media has nothing to do with ferreting out actual facts or truth. It is simply about making money and getting the most ratings.

Many people have just gotten so sick of it that they don't even watch or read the "news" anymore. IMO, that has led to people choosing to be unawares of the goings-on in their communities, nation and the world. That, IMO, is a dangerous thing.
Click to expand...

100% agree. Your right, it's why a lot of people don't like/trust the media anymore. What makes that frustrating in this case is because there has been very little evidence released yet, the only other thing to go on is what the media reports, which we find out time and time again is either incorrect, not factual or over-sensationalized.
 
Aedrys said:
Yep, and someone took pics and turned around and sold one of them to ABC. I'm liking SPD less and less every day.
Click to expand...

.........and that act of selling the pics, well, we know how that makes the person who took them open to attack on the stand, if they ever make it there. :banghead: What are folks thinking when they sell photos to the media? Guess they are ignorant to what happens in other cases as to credibility on the stand.

Also :twocents:, in that photo, the way the blood flow patterns are, it appears that he has had his head down for some time versus in the normal looking forward position. And I don't see that he's had impressions of his hands on his head to interfere with the flow - so would consider MOO that he didn't perhaps have use of his hands as normal reaction may be to touch the area - but don't see evidence of that in the photo.

:moo::moo:
 
Just K said:
As some have stated, we don't even know when that gun came out. We also don't know if GZ chased TM and in the process the two fell to the ground, with TM landing on top. Unless someone video taped the chasing through the two of them landing on the ground, we may never have the real story as to how, when or why that gun came out or how the two ended up in the position that they ended up in.

At best, it is an unholy mess. BUT, a mess that began because GZ assumed that TM was guilty of a crime that had not even been committed.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. It is a mess. However, in a court of law, "who is responsible for how it ended" will be more important than "who is responsible for how it began". In my lay opinion
 
Before I go to work...
It doesn't really matter what someone was like 11 years ago, What matters is what actually caused this chain of events which led to a young guy getting shot down. Because, IMO, a "do-gooder" took it upon himself to play "cops and robbers." Only thing is, the other person, TM, didn't know ahead of time that GZ wanted him to participate. Another example of GZ doing what he wants whether the other person has a say in it or not. All IMO, of course.
 
Karmady said:
Have you seen any commentary from lawyers (other than the Crump firm -- did I get the nomenclature right?) weigh in in favor of the prosecution? Just curious. I've seen Dershowitz, obviously, and the lawyer mentioned in that same article, but I don't think I've seen any weighing in on the other side.
Click to expand...

Most of the TH's have been pretty cautious in how they try to forecast. A good majority of them, no matter if they defense lawyers or former prosecutors, have agree that this is going to be a tough case to prosecute as a 2nd degree murder charge.
 
saguaro said:
They'd be skewered by some and get death threats by others if they were to come forward.

IMO!
Click to expand...

Why would someone threaten them for taking a picture? I do not think anyone has threatened witnesses in this case. The picture is what it is. If someone were really afraid they never would have released the picture to the media in the first place. There could only be just so many people that could have taken that picture and since LE claimed GZ was in custoday at 7:17 when Ofc. Smith arrived a picture taken at 7:19 showing GZ on a cell phone might be a concern for the police department. A person hiding their identity leads people to believe this picture is not what it appears to be. Why else would someone disassociate themselves from it? Sets that old hinky meter into overdrive. jmo
 
Elley Mae said:
It is really sad that one person can be in a position to cause so much hurt and hatred directed at one person to cause death threats all for the ratings. welcome to america jmo
Click to expand...

I agree with you, however when I read the word, conservative, and that conservatives were complaining about it, it kind of made me not want to read anymore.

This is not one sided as some out there want to portray it to be. I've read some of the most vile and vulgar things on certain political sites that literally made me want to throw up, distorted facts and outright lies. Then we have Fox news, who are in a class all by themselves when it comes to distortions.

I wish they all would take a step back.

JMHO
 
annalia said:
How is it not a fair comparison? It's a perfect comparison.

Exactly, we're not seeing 11 year old pictures of Trayvon, we only saw pics that were a few years old because Trayvon had just turned 17, yet they were attacked for that as if they were intentionally trying to hide something. I've said many times, it's not like Trayvon was 30 and they were showing pics from when he was a baby, he had just turned 17, they were only a few years old

And again, that's the point, Trayvon's family didn't have as many choices, GZ's family certainly had newer pictures of GZ, but they chose an 11 year old high school photo.

So I ask was it something sinister, or maybe simply that photo was special to them, or maybe that photo was a photo they had handy?

JMHO
Click to expand...

I don't blame the parents, if that's the photos they provided, so be it. I lean more on the news agencies, considering that it's now been 2 months, more recent photos have been published and yet I still see some news stories that run with the first TM photo we saw and the 2005 GZ mugshot, side by side. That's sensationalism to me IMO.
 
If I were a cop, I would be pretty darn sure that all the guns were contained before I started photographing anything. Especially a shooter's head. That is why I don't think an on duty officer took the picture...but I might be wrong.
 
annalia said:
How is it not a fair comparison? It's a perfect comparison.

Exactly, we're not seeing 11 year old pictures of Trayvon, we only saw pics that were a few years old because Trayvon had just turned 17, yet they were attacked for that as if they were intentionally trying to hide something. I've said many times, it's not like Trayvon was 30 and they were showing pics from when he was a baby, he had just turned 17, they were only a few years old

And again, that's the point, Trayvon's family didn't have as many choices, GZ's family certainly had newer pictures of GZ, but they chose an 11 year old high school photo.

So I ask was it something sinister, or maybe simply that photo was special to them, or maybe that photo was a photo they had handy?

JMHO
Click to expand...

I don't remember the exactly news source I first saw "the photos" but the ones I first saw were TN in maroon or burgandy Hollister shirt and GZ in orange jail shirt. That is the image that "they" wanted to portray to us, I do not think it had anything to do with availability of pics. jmo I was done to get attention for all the wrong reasons. jmo
 
Adrienne37 said:
It would be very nice if we had a few attorneys to weigh in like we've had previously and then that way there is absolutely no doubt as what is legal and what is not. <mod snip>


~jmo~
Click to expand...

:moo::moo: Doubt that will happen until a *dedicated thread* for lawyers only is set up on the forum as too much for them to slog through and moves too fast IMHO MOO :moo:
 
LambChop said:
Why would someone threaten them for taking a picture? I do not think anyone has threatened witnesses in this case. The picture is what it is. If someone were really afraid they never would have released the picture to the media in the first place. There could only be just so many people that could have taken that picture and since LE claimed GZ was in custoday at 7:17 when Ofc. Smith arrived a picture taken at 7:19 showing GZ on a cell phone might be a concern for the police department. A person hiding their identity leads people to believe this picture is not what it appears to be. Why else would someone disassociate themselves from it? Sets that old hinky meter into overdrive. jmo
Click to expand...

There's a perception that if you associate yourself with GZ that it will open you up to all sorts of criticism since that's not the 'popular' thing to do. Apparently FT has no issue with this, or loves the spotlight because he has no trouble running his mouth in front of cameras.

Maybe the person who took the photo doesn't want the attention and I don't mean negative attention, but any attention? You know as soon as it would be found that who exactly this person is, the media would be camped on their doorstep asking questions about that night, they would have to hire a lawyer to speak for them, etc. Some people don't want any of that.
 
cityslick said:
Most of the TH's have been pretty cautious in how they try to forecast. A good majority of them, no matter if they defense lawyers or former prosecutors, have agree that this is going to be a tough case to prosecute as a 2nd degree murder charge.
Click to expand...

There have been legal analysts and TH's who have spoken in favor of the prosecution. Don't know their names but on JVM there were those who spoke after the bond hearing who said the prosecution did just fine at the hearing.

There have also been legal analysts and TH's who have said that SYG doesn't apply to GZ.

From all the shows I've watched, there always seems to be pro and con, and they seem anything but cautious, lol, they get pretty loud at times, I haven't really seen that the majority favor one over the other.

That's why what these talking heads say, Alan Dershowitz included, shouldn't be taken as gospel. They are all speculating.

JMHO
 
cityslick said:
There's a perception that if you associate yourself with GZ that it will open you up to all sorts of criticism since that's not the 'popular' thing to do. Apparently FT has no issue with this, or loves the spotlight because he has no trouble running his mouth in front of cameras.

Maybe the person who took the photo doesn't want the attention and I don't mean negative attention, but any attention? You know as soon as it would be found that who exactly this person is, the media would be camped on their doorstep asking questions about that night, they would have to hire a lawyer to speak for them, etc. Some people don't want any of that.
Click to expand...

Yep, and within hours of O'Mara "slipping up" and saying the GF's name in open court & in front of the media, people were digging up her social network pages.
 
cityslick said:
There's a perception that if you associate yourself with GZ that it will open you up to all sorts of criticism since that's not the 'popular' thing to do. Apparently FT has no issue with this, or loves the spotlight because he has no trouble running his mouth in front of cameras.

Maybe the person who took the photo doesn't want the attention and I don't mean negative attention, but any attention? You know as soon as it would be found that who exactly this person is, the media would be camped on their doorstep asking questions about that night, they would have to hire a lawyer to speak for them, etc. Some people don't want any of that.
Click to expand...

I agree with this opinion in concept. However, in a case of alleged murder, if by some chance I got potential evidence, I think I would have turned it over to the investigators and stopped there.

Because if it really is evidence, providing it to the media is an attempt to involve oneself and then claim anonymity. Either you stand behind your picture or you do not. If the person provided it to Investigators and it ended there, I'd have less question about motivation of the person who took the picture.
 
magnolia said:
I agree with you. It is a mess. However, in a court of law, "who is responsible for how it ended" will be more important than "who is responsible for how it began". In my lay opinion
Click to expand...

But that's the thing, there are those in the legal field who say how it began is very important in a court of law.

The SYG hearing will be very interesting and in the end the only thing that really matters is what the judge will rule.

JMHO
 
cityslick said:
There's not a whole lot of people in this world who show 'young and full of life' after they get arrested though.
Click to expand...

And who smiles after being arrested?
That would make no sense IMO.

I could just see how the coversations would go if he were cheesing it up in his mug shot, his first court date, or his bond hearing!
People would be talking about that for sure.

IMO I would not be grinning after I was arrested either.

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 162 more.
Total: 2,524 (members: 163, guests: 2,361)

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
2,361
Total visitors
2,524
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,126
Messages
17,963,599
Members
228,689
Latest member
Melladanielle
Back
Top