FBI considering hate crime charges against Zimmerman #1

[HiHater]

I think you made her point.

I think you missed the point. 2 different types of profiling, done under very different circumstances. One type is informed by education/statistics/etc. the other kind is informed by ignorance.

No, FBI profilers shouldn't all be arrested---but I'm glad GZ was!

 

[stmarysmead]

Again, it is clear that GZ was motivated by statistics not ignorance. In fact, "ignorance" would be paying no attention to the demographic of those committing most of the crimes. And that DEmographic could simply have been...teenagers.

 

[suzihawk]

I said it before wrt to Dershowitz's comments, and I'll say it again, all you need to know is the standard for murder2 and the allegations of the PCA to know whether the charges should have been brought. Doesn't matter what other evidence the SP supposedly has. The charging document must be sufficient. I agree with Dershowitz and many others, that the PCA is a <modsnip> and the charges were brought entirely for political reasons.

That doesn't make sense. If the charges were brought entirely for political reasons, I'd think AC would be confident it was case she thought she could win. Why would she bring unfounded charges in an extremely high profile case she would be sure to lose, if it was entirely for political reasons?

 

[gxm]

IMO, it would be disastrous for the FBI to charge GZ with a hate crime. There is no evidence of racial animosity present in this crime. The idea that regular citizens can be arrested and charged with hate crimes for being suspicious of someone of a different race is a truly terrifying one.

JMO, OMO, and MOO

 

[LambChop]

Again, it is clear that GZ was motivated by statistics not ignorance. In fact, "ignorance" would be paying no attention to the demographic of those committing most of the crimes. And that DEmographic could simply have been...teenagers.

I think the person who was doing most of the breakins of the homes was caught. It ended up being someone within the community who had a prior arrest record and was on probation. This person was arrested in February after the FT incident at his home. There was no reason for GZ to think TM was committing a crime, none, when the person had already been arrested and GZ was aware of that. And obviously if some of these teens "got away" it could be because it was the same person. No proof it wasn't. If someone lives there they are in the perfect position to see who is home, who leaves for work, etc.

What proof is there that there were eight different teens trying to break into the these homes when they "got away"? If they got away, how would anyone know for sure who they were. They weren't identified or they would have been arrested. For all we know it was that one person and maybe some of his friends. Logic would tell you if the person was caught and there have been no more attempts, you probably got the right person. We certainly know it was not TM.

So in that respect GZ was profiling TM. Does not mean it was a hate crime. Profiling is deciding someone is up to no good just because of their appearance, which is exactly what GZ did. He can't deny it, it's on tape. Now whether he did it because of hate, I doubt the FBI will come to that conclusion unless there are witnesses who feel he is a racists and can give the FBI proof. jmo

 

[LambChop]

That doesn't make sense. If the charges were brought entirely for political reasons, I'd think AC would be confident it was case she thought she could win. Why would she bring unfounded charges in an extremely high profile case she would be sure to lose, if it was entirely for political reasons?

Talk about political....lol It was Wolfinger that stepped down citing "conflict of interest" and the Chief stepping completely out of the picture completely citing "because of my involvement" I think AC was doing what she was told and this case was assigned to her because Sanford could not be trusted. IMO that would be pretty obvious to us all.

Seems to me the Martins said early on they wanted the truth and would accept it whatever that truth might be. Whatever happened that night should have made sense when GZ gave his statements. We just are now seeing that and questioning GZ's actions is the right thing to do.

I would find it ironic if the defense camp were complaining about the use of politics. That in mind, the Martins had every right to ask for help from the FBI and to have the case looked into by another DA outside of Sanford. jmo

 

[sleonardelli]

I think the person who was doing most of the breakins of the homes was caught. It ended up being someone within the community who had a prior arrest record and was on probation. This person was arrested in February after the FT incident at his home. There was no reason for GZ to think TM was committing a crime, none, when the person had already been arrested and GZ was aware of that. And obviously if some of these teens "got away" it could be because it was the same person. No proof it wasn't. If someone lives there they are in the perfect position to see who is home, who leaves for work, etc.

What proof is there that there were eight different teens trying to break into the these homes when they "got away"? If they got away, how would anyone know for sure who they were. They weren't identified or they would have been arrested. For all we know it was that one person and maybe some of his friends. Logic would tell you if the person was caught and there have been no more attempts, you probably got the right person. We certainly know it was not TM.

So in that respect GZ was profiling TM. Does not mean it was a hate crime. Profiling is deciding someone is up to no good just because of their appearance, which is exactly what GZ did. He can't deny it, it's on tape. Now whether he did it because of hate, I doubt the FBI will come to that conclusion unless there are witnesses who feel he is a racists and can give the FBI proof. jmo

I recall reading an article about how he accused some black teens or that he found them "suspicious" and they turned out to be guests in the neighborhood. One guy, with dreadlocks, even had to go to the police station to explain that he was invited there.

 

[suzihawk]

I recall reading an article about how he accused some black teens or that he found them "suspicious" and they turned out to be guests in the neighborhood. One guy, with dreadlocks, even had to go to the police station to explain that he was invited there.

It would be interesting to see how many insurance claims were made by the residents for stolen property and who filed them?

 

[HiHater]

Have you ever had a debate with friends on opposite sides of a hot button issue and find that when you are all reasonable, there is often a solid middle ground. I think that would be possible in this case.

I see no problem with GZ getting out of the car, but I have read good posts articulating the other point of view. I don't believe GZ initiated physical contact but there are no witnesses, so we all are free to enjoy our own speculation. It is the Race infusion in this case that IMO pushes people into hard angry corners.

If the crime stats show a problem with young Black teens or even just teens...there is an explanation other than race for watching GZ. So all this talk of profiling and "hate crimes" seems grossly unfair and as if politicans and Crump are "using" this tragedy for other purposes.

Because those of us who are not a minority have a right to ask how broad our government intends to make "criminalizing" offending someone? Because the "profiling" charge PRECEDES the death here. Take the profiling/race card out of this and we are left with that tragic death, two minorities who somehow clashed, and questions that must be answered.

The Martins are imminently entitled to all that and to the most fair and honest examination of the evidence. I'll have to see all of it before I say there should be a trial. It may be that laws need to be changed in order to prevent NO CHARGES but you cannot go back and punish GZ if those laws were in his favor that night.

It seems that the way that Crump is trying to circumvent the Law as it existed that night...is by using RACE. He is manipulating the real concept of "profiling" and using a word that infuriates to get the conviction EVEN if the Law, as it existed that night, does not justify it.

That is what offends MANY people. Using Race...to divide us MORE so that HE can win a conviction...and some believe head into civil suits of Big $$$ potential. Using RACE where the use of it is thin becuase the Law might not win him the case but angry jurors might ignore the Law.

That is not Justice. That is not the way we should want cases won.

That is wrong because it shoves us into far away corners. There is nothing racial about this case. I believe that GZ would have followed a "white/Hispanic" teen that he did not recognize in that area that night. There's no proof he would not. In fact, the Defense might make a good case that age was the compelling factor in GZ's mind. What were the ages of the majority of these criminals?

In fact, GZ and TM both have a look of mixed racial heritage. TM could have been a Black/Hispanic for all GZ knew. It was dark. Nobody wears labels that define their heritage. The factors were that he was a teenager and he was not one of the neighborhood teens. NOT that he was Black.

Or is it "profiling" now in some legal sense to watch teenagers of any and all skin hues that you do not know...when teenagers are targeting your neighborhood with crime?

Really?

Edited to add that Crump's strategy may backfire. If any juror is offended and feel he has overplayed the racial aspect, they may refuse to listen to anything else he says. We have seen this before as in the jury reaction to what they felt was overkill on Casey Anthony. And if he keeps pushing the racial aspect , he diminishes the ability to bring people together to discuss the STG laws. That would surely NOT be Justice for Trayvon.

I like to think that people, of all colors, would be just as outraged if Trayvon and GZ were blue and green.

Beyond the racial implications of GZ's actions, you also have the response of law enforcement officials. They didn't seem to be in a rush to give Trayvon Martin equal protection under the law, until people protested and called for justice. That should not have had to happen, but if it didn't, GZ would have just walked away from killing a 17 year old boy and went right back to work the next day.

Lastly, Crump is not prosecuting or defending this case. So, his relevance in front of a jury is null in my opinion. Jurors are supposed to have not formed any opinion, and nothing Crump said in pretrial media should make its way into the courtroom...

All MOO

 

[songline]

i said it before wrt to dershowitz's comments, and i'll say it again, all you need to know is the standard for murder2 and the allegations of the pca to know whether the charges should have been brought. Doesn't matter what other evidence the sp supposedly has. The charging document must be sufficient. I agree with dershowitz and many others, that the pca <Mod Snip>and the charges were brought entirely for political reasons.

bingo!

 

[HiHater]

Again, it is clear that GZ was motivated by statistics not ignorance. In fact, "ignorance" would be paying no attention to the demographic of those committing most of the crimes. And that DEmographic could simply have been...teenagers.

GZ didn't have complete statistics. He was aware that SOME of the burglaries were committed by young, black males. There has been no evidence that every burglary was even solved. IMO, he clearly had his own racial biases and they played at least some role in this. You don't go door to door warning people about young black males, you warn about crime and inform people to protect themselves. IIRC, some of the burglaries were no force--the perp walked in through a sliding glass door. Instead of telling people to be weary of a group of people, you can tell them to be proactive in protecting your property---at least that's a message that would make more sense to disseminate from my perspective.

jmo

 

[HiHater]

IMO, it would be disastrous for the FBI to charge GZ with a hate crime. There is no evidence of racial animosity present in this crime. The idea that regular citizens can be arrested and charged with hate crimes for being suspicious of someone of a different race is a truly terrifying one.

JMO, OMO, and MOO

The idea that a young, black male is dead in large part because he was a young, black male is terrifying to me. I don't know if a hate crime is warranted in this case, but what GZ did was not okay on many different levels. It's okay to be suspicious of people, but following-confronting-killing them? Where is the line drawn?

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

IMO, it would be disastrous for the FBI to charge GZ with a hate crime. There is no evidence of racial animosity present in this crime. The idea that regular citizens can be arrested and charged with hate crimes for being suspicious of someone of a different race is a truly terrifying one.

JMO, OMO, and MOO

The thing that would make this racial is the alleged excited utterance of the ******ing "oons"...what ever is heard before the ooons...if it is a "C" or "G" and I feel this is a moot point since the FBI couldn't say it was said for certain...the other element is the 'criminal' profiling but that doesn't amount to a hate crime..

I don't believe it has to do with the last sentence in the quote. That's not what a hate crime is all about...it has to be something more egregious than just being of a different race..If GZ stated the "C".....oons, then by all rights that would make it a hate crime for that is a demeaning, disparaging word used to describe AA's....back in the day..only those stuck in their own old school era would use that...I don't hear it used today but back when it was used..

 

[songline]

Have you ever had a debate with friends on opposite sides of a hot button issue and find that when you are all reasonable, there is often a solid middle ground. I think that would be possible in this case.

I see no problem with GZ getting out of the car, but I have read good posts articulating the other point of view. I don't believe GZ initiated physical contact but there are no witnesses, so we all are free to enjoy our own speculation. It is the Race infusion in this case that IMO pushes people into hard angry corners.

If the crime stats show a problem with young Black teens or even just teens...there is an explanation other than race for watching GZ. So all this talk of profiling and "hate crimes" seems grossly unfair and as if politicans and Crump are "using" this tragedy for other purposes.

Because those of us who are not a minority have a right to ask how broad our government intends to make "criminalizing" offending someone? Because the "profiling" charge PRECEDES the death here. Take the profiling/race card out of this and we are left with that tragic death, two minorities who somehow clashed, and questions that must be answered.

The Martins are imminently entitled to all that and to the most fair and honest examination of the evidence. I'll have to see all of it before I say there should be a trial. It may be that laws need to be changed in order to prevent NO CHARGES but you cannot go back and punish GZ if those laws were in his favor that night.

It seems that the way that Crump is trying to circumvent the Law as it existed that night...is by using RACE. He is manipulating the real concept of "profiling" and using a word that infuriates to get the conviction EVEN if the Law, as it existed that night, does not justify it.
That is what offends MANY people. Using Race...to divide us MORE so that HE can win a conviction...and some believe head into civil suits of Big $$$ potential. Using RACE where the use of it is thin becuase the Law might not win him the case but angry jurors might ignore the Law.

That is not Justice. That is not the way we should want cases won.
That is wrong because it shoves us into far away corners. There is nothing racial about this case. I believe that GZ would have followed a "white/Hispanic" teen that he did not recognize in that area that night. There's no proof he would not. In fact, the Defense might make a good case that age was the compelling factor in GZ's mind. What were the ages of the majority of these criminals?

In fact, GZ and TM both have a look of mixed racial heritage. TM could have been a Black/Hispanic for all GZ knew. It was dark. Nobody wears labels that define their heritage. The factors were that he was a teenager and he was not one of the neighborhood teens. NOT that he was Black.

Or is it "profiling" now in some legal sense to watch teenagers of any and all skin hues that you do not know...when teenagers are targeting your neighborhood with crime?

Really?

Edited to add that Crump's strategy may backfire. If any juror is offended and feel he has overplayed the racial aspect, they may refuse to listen to anything else he says. We have seen this before as in the jury reaction to what they felt was overkill on Casey Anthony. And if he keeps pushing the racial aspect , he diminishes the ability to bring people together to discuss the STG laws. That would surely NOT be Justice for Trayvon.

BBM There in lies the essense of what the Martin team is doing.
Everything I made bold I agree with (ITA with the entire post) and it has nothing to do with the case.
there for the hate crime IMO is from thier side.
While I have said from day one that an investigation should happen. I also said "not that way, and not that team"

 

[songline]

The idea that a young, black male is dead in large part because he was a young, black male is terrifying to me. I don't know if a hate crime is warranted in this case, but what GZ did was not okay on many different levels. It's okay to be suspicious of people, but following-confronting-killing them? Where is the line drawn?

hmmmm BBM - based on this description, there is no room to consider what if Tryavon did jump him?
Based on your description it sounds like GZ profiled, perused and killed... THAT IS NOT what happened.

 

[HiHater]

hmmmm BBM - based on this description, there is no room to consider what if Tryavon did jump him?
Based on your description it sounds like GZ profiled, perused and killed... THAT IS NOT what happened.

Did GZ not follow, confront, and subsequently kill Trayvon?

 

[stmarysmead]

I like to think that people, of all colors, would be just as outraged if Trayvon and GZ were blue and green.

Beyond the racial implications of GZ's actions, you also have the response of law enforcement officials. They didn't seem to be in a rush to give Trayvon Martin equal protection under the law, until people protested and called for justice. That should not have had to happen, but if it didn't, GZ would have just walked away from killing a 17 year old boy and went right back to work the next day.

Lastly, Crump is not prosecuting or defending this case. So, his relevance in front of a jury is null in my opinion. Jurors are supposed to have not formed any opinion, and nothing Crump said in pretrial media should make its way into the courtroom...

All MOO

The problem the poice had that night was the SYG law. It seems to me to also have a wide latitude. If witnesses said GZ was screaming for help, and TM was on top, and GZ had injuries, this Law, as it stands, gave the police and first DA a logical rationale for not charging GZ. Is SYG a good law? That should be the debate. But it is NOT a racist law. It would have given a Black man the abiiity to walk away as well under the same circumstances. So it's a controversial LAW, not the police, and certaily, not GZ, that makes many feel TM was not getting justice. Fury should be directed at changing that law...not calling "racism." Because the Law protects and "ignores" regardless of skin hue.

Remove emotion and you have no racism, but possibly poorly written or just bad LAW.

But even if the police were racist....that does not mean GZ should pay for it by trying to make him a racist for his very logical following of a someone who fit the demographic of the crime statistics targeting his neighbors and him.

The media report that GZ made a racial slur is in dispute and I believe has even been walked back. Why is the media "investigating" anyway? They pay "experts" who differ from other experts and they should just be reporting what actually is in court documents. These "experts" are guessing anyway. Most of these tapes are garbled. I don't think a man should spend the rest of his life in prison because of differing opinions on what a tape says.

As for GZ having "complete statistics"...come on. There was enough stuff going on in that neighborhood that they ha the police out to meet with the neighbors. Let's just say, the problem was teenage kids. OfCOURSE, everyone would be watching a teenage kid, at night, that was not known in the neighborhood. hat is not RACIAL. That is what common sense from our experiences teaches us to do.

Do you want my AA neighbor hauled into court and sued for watching white thugs when they are a neighborhood problem?

This case was made racial only because the SYG LAW wasn't going to allow Crump to "get" GZ. That is not justice and it may backfire if a jury feels , as many do, that he has overplayed his hand.

 

[LambChop]

hmmmm BBM - based on this description, there is no room to consider what if Tryavon did jump him?
Based on your description it sounds like GZ profiled, perused and killed... THAT IS NOT what happened.

Actually that is exactly what happened considering TM was not involved in any crime and in GZ's call to LE he starts off by saying there have been breakins in the past and TM looks suspicious. GZ never reported a crime he saw TM committing. GZ knew also there had been an arrest of someone living in the community who was doing the breakins. Since TM was NOT involved in a crime, it makes it profiling. Gilbreath said GZ was profiling. The FBI is investigating for profiling. Does it rise to the level of a "hate" crime, I doubt it unless the FBI has more information. But GZ fits the description to a T when you look up the definition of profiling. Even down to the part where he was "acting" on behalf of LE and essentially doing their job for them.

Also that first site that GZ had, the one he set up himself with the picture of the black church that had the "hate" message on it, not going to do GZ any favors. It made it look as if he supported that type of activities. IMO the money contributed from those who do support that type of behavior would have been welcome by GZ at the time. jmo

 

[Maxim]

I think you missed the point. 2 different types of profiling, done under very different circumstances. One type is informed by education/statistics/etc. the other kind is informed by ignorance.

No, FBI profilers shouldn't all be arrested---but I'm glad GZ was!

There were plenty of profilers around the case:

The media and race baiters who profiled GZ (immediately) as a White man against a little, black 12yo kid.
When that was wrong . . .
He's a White/Hispanic against a young, black kid.
Wrong again.
He's Hispanic against a young, black teen, outweighed him by 100 lbs.
Wrong again . . . 27 lbs. approximately.
When it turned out he is a Black/Hispanic, he's a zealot because no one defends his community to make it better and he hates his race.

It couldn't possibly be anything else because we know the GZs of the world.

Profiling?

 

[HiHater]

The problem the poice had that night was the SYG law. It seems to me to also have a wide latitude. If witnesses said GZ was screaming for help, and TM was on top, and GZ had injuries, this Law, as it stands, gave the police and first DA a logical rationale for not charging GZ. Is SYG a good law? That should be the debate. But it is NOT a racist law. It would have given a Black man the abiiity to walk away as well under the same circumstances. So it's a controversial LAW, not the police, and certaily, not GZ, that makes many feel TM was not getting justice. Fury should be directed at changing that law...not calling "racism." Because the Law protects and "ignores" regardless of skin hue.

Remove emotion and you have no racism, but possibly poorly written or just bad LAW.

But even if the police were racist....that does not mean GZ should pay for it by trying to make him a racist for his very logical following of a someone who fit the demographic of the crime statistics targeting his neighbors and him.

The media report that GZ made a racial slur is in dispute and I believe has even been walked back. Why is the media "investigating" anyway? They pay "experts" who differ from other experts and they should just be reporting what actually is in court documents. These "experts" are guessing anyway. Most of these tapes are garbled. I don't think a man should spend the rest of his life in prison because of differing opinions on what a tape says.

As for GZ having "complete statistics"...come on. There was enough stuff going on in that neighborhood that they ha the police out to meet with the neighbors. Let's just say, the problem was teenage kids. OfCOURSE, everyone would be watching a teenage kid, at night, that was not known in the neighborhood. hat is not RACIAL. That is what common sense from our experiences teaches us to do.

Do you want my AA neighbor hauled into court and sued for watching white thugs when they are a neighborhood problem?

This case was made racial only because the SYG LAW wasn't going to allow Crump to "get" GZ. That is not justice and it may backfire if a jury feels , as many do, that he has overplayed his hand.

I would just like to point out, again, that Crump has no hand to play except for in a civil court setting. He is not going to be at the prosecution or defense table at a trial, is he?

I'm not willing to say the problem was teenage kids. I don't know that, and I don't see how you do either? Some of the burglaries were unsolved, and in the other cases, I don't remember a teenager being the suspect necessarily. I'd have to go read back over that to say one way or the other though.

GZ did NOT know every single person in that neighborhood, so there could have been any number of people who were unfamiliar to him walking around at any given time. Why he honed in on this particular person and pegged him as suspicious can only be debated.

JMO