Skip to main content

View Diary: Trayvon and George: True or False Test (81 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  some of his stuff had some spin in it (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Grabber by the Heel, terrybuck

    spin away from pure facts. I've seen that on both sides. Also, Some of it was irrelevant.

    How does this add any understanding? None of this is relevant to what happened that night. None is evidence of violence. Using words like "often" is suspect ("often truant") because it could have been a few times, or blurs so called "facts" Facts are numbers.

    Evidence of break in tools, (this never went to court, he wasnt' arrested nor charged) does not show violence. Since TM was not walking outside to scout the place in order to break in  (his 12 yr old stepbrother was waiting at home to watch the game with him), which is not disputed, this too is irrelevant.
    Whenver people try to color kids as Good or Bad...not understanding that this petty stuff has NOTHING to do with violence, I think they must not know many teenagers especially those not raised in a wealthy suburb.

    Irrelevant stuff shows bias:
    Trayvon had been suspended two or three times and was often truant. T.
    School officials found evidence of break in within his backpack when searching it after Trayvon spray painted lockers within the school. T
    Trayvon was 17, was not living his mother, nor at his father's during the prior school year, and he was currently staying at yet a different house  ( the mistress of his uncle? ) T

    Most telling to me of bias is leaving out of ZImmermans well document police record of violence. At least three incidents with the police in last ten years, one for assaulting a police officer! (how he got away with that is beyond me...connections due to his magistrate dad?) He also got FIRED from a bouncer job for slamming a female patron against a wall. A record of violence is much more important and salient to this case than being suspended from school.

    Kids often act out when there is stress at home. Clearly there must have been given his living situation. Perhaps the diarist wishes to imply that TM was so troubled that he was kicked out of his mothers home. More likely given my experience is that, if he was living with the uncle or being parented by that uncle if the mother felt he needed a male in his life down where the lived in S. FL.

    Again I am left to wonder if the diarist knows many teenagers of a variety of races and socioeconomic levels.

    •  Yellow journalism (0+ / 0-)

      The point here is that those issues that TM had were never discussed or if they were, as in your comment, they were excused.  No so for anything about Zimmerman.  TM had a clear history about texting or tweeting about fights and being a gangsta.  This affects his mindset as much as Zimmerman's wanting to be a cop influenced his.  Yet this is never discussed.  The assumption is made that TM was just walking home, but no one ever just walks home.  We are all, at all times, sending signals about who we are.  TM was sending signals about who he was, a gangsta wannabe, a person who almost certainly had been in possession stolen property.  

      And yes he did almost certainly possess stolen property.  He was found with a plastic bag full of women's jewelry and said a friend gave it to him.  He refused to identify the friend.  No one came forward to identify the property, neither the rightful owner or the "friend."  What that means is that the "friend" if he or she even existed, probably didn't have clear title.  

      And there was the four minutes.  If TM had just been innocently going home, he would have been home.  He waited somewhere near the T for four minutes. (or two or three as the prosecution contended.)  Waited for what?  A reasonable inference is that he waited to do what he texted or tweeted he liked to do best, fight.  

      The point is the press and a part of the public has embraced a story which is at best incomplete and extremely biased against Zimmerman.  Before this incident if anyone was asked to evaluate these two men they would have said Zimmerman was a good guy, and Trayvon was a kid heading down the wrong path.  But this story has not been told.  

      As I said, we have to be better than the right, better than fox, or redstate.  We are not being better on this story.  

      •  again, even if jewelry (0+ / 0-)

        was from theft or receiving stolen goods WHAT does it have to do with his propensity toward violence?
        Just to try your scenario on, are you saying that "see GZ's assumption  TM was a thief might have been right after all!"?

        My guess is you are not. Somehow you are saying that the possibility he was a thief ties into his likelyhood that he GZ story of being attacked for "no reason" by TM is (more) true?

        The defense, some say, leaked all the background on TM. It was well discussed in public. When you say "it was not discussed", do you mean at the trial?

        I think it was barred from being discussed at trial iirc because TM is not on trial (though sometimes it seems he was), GZ was. It was deemed as not relevant. I think also this is why GZ record of violence (as far as I know) wasn't discussed at trial.

        GZ record of physical confrontations and violence that required police involvement multiple times is directly related to the charges.

        GZ, today, would not argue that he was RIGHT in his initial assessment of TM as out that night for the purpose of breaking in to homes. It was discovered he went out to get a snack...he was caught by a security camera buying that snack...the snack was found next to his dead body. He was expected back at home to watch the all Star game with his younger stepbrother. It is clear GZ was WRONG about TM that night in his assuming TM was guilty of something that night.

        TM was not chased (however briefly) by GZ and the police were not called by GZ because of anything TM had done before that night.

        TM pot smoking or suspensions for skipping school or even the jewelry are not related to what happened that night. I admit any evidence of him being violent on an instigator of fights IS evidence for GZ.

        But GZ direct history of physically loosing his cool...being that he is on trial exactly for  extremely important. To not allow that in-which they didn't as far as I know--is stunning.

        They should have allowed in history of violence of both of them.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site