 sj |
||
|
||
BS: George Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 09:01 AM Interesting... My above post was the 1619th post... 1619??? What's the relevance??? 1619 was the year that the first African slaves were brought to the "New World"... For the next 244 years slavery was legal... After the Emancipation Proclamation black Americans suffered from 110 years of Jim Crow on crack cocaine and now seeing Jim Crow's revival with the Tea Party ascent... 1619 was a shameful year for our nation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 08:39 AM The sad thing about this all, Don, is that there are still way too many white people who haven't come all that far from the days when black people were being lynched... Yeah, they always have their rationalizations just like we read here from the MudKKers who continue to defend their right to murder black people... I've lived long enough to remember the Klan... I've known folks who were in the Klan... I've heard their rhetoric... I can smell Klan from a mile away... This is what institutional racism looks like... You won't change the minds and hearts of the two MudKKers here, Don... Their minds and hearts are too hardened... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Aug 13 - 05:24 AM From day one the Sanford authorities portrayed Zimmerman as the victim and Martin as a thug, and that didn't change at the trial. Nobody in this whole sorry mess stood up for Trayvon Martin's constitutional right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but there are people all over the southern states celebrating the victory of Vigilante Law over US Law. This video is worth a listen as it encapsulates everything I have been trying to put across in this thread. The following article is also relevant to the way in which the authorities spat upon the corpse of a murdered teenager: ""Florida jurors heard that Trayvon Martin was aggressive and paranoid due to marijuana intoxication the night he was murdered. But was he? Carl Hart, a neuropsychopharmacologist who spent fifteen years studying the neurophysiological, psychological and behavioral effects of marijuana, finds this line of reasoning "laughable" in The New York Times. "The toxicology exam, which was conducted the morning after Mr. Martin was killed, found a mere 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in his body. This strongly suggests he had not ingested marijuana for at least 24 hours. This is also far below the THC levels that I have found necessary, in my experimental research on dozens of subjects, to induce intoxication: between 40 and 400 nanograms per milliliter. In fact, his THC levels were significantly lower than the sober, baseline levels of about 14 nanograms per milliliter of many of my patients, who are daily users. Mr. Martin could not have been intoxicated with marijuana at the time of the shooting; the amount of THC found in his system was too low for it to have had any meaningful effect on him." "" This is indicative of the lengths Sanford law personnel were willing to go to, in order to paint Trayvon Martin as a drugged up thug and portray him as responsible for his own death. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 30 Aug 13 - 03:21 AM Then stop doing it. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Aug 13 - 07:35 PM One would think that a right wing non-musican coming to a folk musicians web site would just stick with other topics other than pushing his right winged, ignorant mythology... Go figure??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 29 Aug 13 - 04:54 PM And, after 1,615 posts, somebody ought to tell you to go fuck yourselves... Go fuck yourselves! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 29 Aug 13 - 04:48 PM In honor of Greg F., I feel I should say this: Bullshit Bruce, You are so full of bullshit. Eat fucking shit and die. Yours Truly, Greg F. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 29 Aug 13 - 12:51 PM A CNN interview with Trayvon Martin's parents HERE. You'll have to sit through a commercial, though. Most interesting! Hang in. There is also a video of Zimmerman's arrival at the police station, in which there are no visible signs of injury. Early on, I recall seeing several pictures of Zimmerman's "injuries." The cut on the back of his head appeared in different places in the different photos, and the amount of blood varied from a trickle to a flood. Lousy Photoshopping job. And also early on, no sign of a broken nose. Maybe Zimmerman ran into a door? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 29 Aug 13 - 12:19 PM Goofball, I don't get my information from blogs, like you do. I get my information from several varied news sources, examining all viewpoints, endeavoring to find out what really happened--not, as you do, to find back-up for anybody's prejudices, especially whatever my own my happen to be. I was a news editor, remember? I know how to suss out the facts from various reports. You should really try to stop your knee from jerking like that. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Aug 13 - 08:50 AM Here's what makes this entire issue so sickening... The Zimmerman worshipers here and elsewhere have never voiced any remorse for the death of Trayvon Martin... That says more about their humanity, or lack there of... Pretty heartless... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Aug 13 - 08:45 AM ""Zimmerman THOUGHT that he was acting suspiciously ( as he stated on the 911 call, a FACT you ignore) and wanted to see what he was up to, like a NEIGHBORHOOD WATVH person should do WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE ACTING SUSPICIOUSLY."" I've seen quite a lot of that kind of suspicion in my time BB! "What's that black kid doing in my neighbourhood, he must be up to no good!" And it would never occur to him that the kid was taking sideways glances because he was wondering "who was following him and why?" Zimmerman would have taken no notice whatever of a white kid. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Aug 13 - 02:35 AM Show it...and not from a blog. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 11:08 PM Load of dingoes kidneys. Trayvon Martin's mother said that race DID play a part in it, but they weren't going to try to make an issue of it. Undoubtedly because it would probably stir up all manner of racial unrest. Anyone who seriously believes that Zimmerman was NOT racially profiling Trayvon Martin is not playing with a full deck. And who, pray tell, is the racist here? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:19 PM ....the Martin family publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race. ..The Martin's personal attorney said THEY didn't think it was about race...the defense attorneys (separately from the personal family attorney) publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race...the prosecution publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, the police publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, the court's testimony showed that THEY didn't think it was a race issue, the jury members who gave interviews, publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race...the FBI investigated Zimmerman AND 36 of his known acquaintances and they publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, nor did any evidence come up to indicate that Zimmerman had racial bigotry, in fact, they found he worked with 'minority' kids, prior to this..... That being said, AGAIN, Today I heard Rev. Bernice King, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s daughter give a speech, where she said 'replace hate with love'. Anybody listening?......or are you being a little too racist? ....and let's not start with a racist bias, one way or the other, and cherry pick what you WANT to believe, to support that bias...people get hurt or dead...ask Rachel Jeantel, who advised Trayvon, that the guy following him was probably a homosexual rapist. As far as the information that led people to get all 'excited' that this was just about race, you might consider this and why some of you are determined that this was all about race. And consider this: March 13, 2012 - Sanford Police Department's homicide detective Christopher Serino recommends Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. IF THAT HAD HAPPENED, Zimmerman more than likely would have been convicted. ...and I've said repeatedly, that the prosecution bungled this case.... That being said, AGAIN, Today I heard Rev. Bernice King, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s daughter give a speech, where she said 'replace hate with love'. Anybody listening?......or are you being a little too racist? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:31 PM This isn't all that complicated... An adult white man with a gun stalked and murdered an unarmed teenager walking home from a convenience store... This adult white man is a confessed liar... Liars lie and lie and lie... That is this adult white male... The Florida justice ain't got much justice in it so they let the adult white armed lyin' ass cracker off... The End B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:07 PM Yo, Bullshit Bruce- Thanks for the barge-load of horseshit, but you STILL haven't provided any evidence to support your claim: "to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:53 PM What is the cost of injustice??? A lot more than we think... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:53 PM George Zimmerman just went shopping for one of THESE. (Scroll down a bit.) Now, he can REALLY go hunting! Don Firth P. S. I don't know how long that web site will be there, but if it goes away soon, THIS is the sort of little toy he was interested in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:47 PM They can ask for whatever they want, but they won't get it. Those on CNN familiar with Florida law say that all the law will cover will be "out-of-pocket fees," not attorneys' fees, which make up the lion's share of Zimmerman's expenses. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. Mark Nejame estimates that if Zimmerman's lawyers file for $200,000, the court will likely award him $10,000 - $20,000. Filing for every imaginable reimbursement appears to be a standard legal move in Florida for an acquitted criminal defendant. Those seeking outrage should, once again, look elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:29 PM And in related news: "Shellie Zimmerman — wife of George Zimmerman, the Florida man who was acquitted of murder charges in the shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin — pleaded guilty to charges of perjury Wednesday for misleading a judge about the state of her family's finances. According to CNN, Shellie Zimmerman was sentenced to one year of probation, 100 hours of community service and ordered to write a letter of apology to Judge Kenneth Lester within 30 days and reimburse the court for legal costs. She pleaded guilty to lying to Judge Lester in an April 2012 bond hearing in which she alleged that her family was indigent. In fact, the Zimmermans had more than $135,000 in donated defense fund money sitting in the bank at the time. In pleading guilty to perjury rather than going to trial on the original third-degree felony charge of perjury in an official proceeding, Mrs. Zimmerman avoided much higher fines and possible prison time. George Zimmerman was found not guilty by a six-member jury in July. His attorneys filed a reimbursement request with the state of Florida on Tuesday asking that the court costs of George Zimmerman's defense be partially covered by the state. The suit will ask for between $200,000 and $300,000 in fees." Raw Story |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:17 PM Okay Bruce, I'll let you bait me this once more. Gz didn't have to have his gun out when he attempted to detain TM. He knew he had it and it gave him the confidence to attempt to detain him. He knew if TM resisted his wannabe cop take down, he could then "protect" himself. Stand Your Ground allows a person to everything they can to provoke a physical confrontation with an unarmed person, and then pull out your gun and shoot that person if it doesn't go your way. That's just what happened. It's wrong to defend that GZ's actions. And now he wants to sue? Who told him to go out and hire a $400 an hour hotshot lawyer! People are not entitled to be reimbursed for legal fees when acquitted. He lied to the court about his finances which doesn't merit much sympathy for his current financial dilemma. Now that he has been found "not guilty," see how bold he's gotten? He likes being in the spotlight. Doesn't want to give it up. He's such a disgusting creature. With those beady little eyes and fat face, he reminds me of a pig. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 04:42 PM Beardedbruce, when the self-appointed vigilante phoned the police and reported seeing what he thought was a person acting suspiciously (after all, he was a black teenager wearing a hooded sweatshirt, carrying a package of candy and cup of iced tea he had just purchased at a nearby convenience store, and was walking back home--therefore. ipso facto, acting "suspiciously"). The police dispatcher told him to stay in his car until the police got there and NOT to get out and approach the "suspect." [This is not someone's supposition, it is a matter of record.] Zimmerman disobeyed, got out of his car, approached Trayvon Martin, and demanded to know what he was doing there. For all Trayvon Martin knew, this man who had confronted him in an aggressive manner was a mugger. Martin had every right to be there, and confronted in such a manner, obviously felt threatened. So he attempted to defend himself. Does the "stand your ground" law apply to everyone? Or is it for whites only? Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 04:28 PM I already ignore bb, Suze... He does no have any capacity for rational thought... GfinS slips in rational thought just enough to remain on my "don't ignore" list but has been on it a time or two... We differ on one part of this... There were no apparent evidence on Trayvon's body to indicate a fight... I don't think there was a fight but agree, that if there was, Trayvon had every right to defend himself... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 03:33 PM So, SSP, YOU were there with BullshitBobert and Greggie boy the racist, and saw everything? The trial evidence from OTHER people , presented by the PROSECUTION, indicates Zimmerman did NOT have his gun out when he was knocked down. So, how did he "detain" anyone/ He COULD have asked what Martin was doing, which some here consider an assault, but he WAS knocked down and beaten, which some here consider to be a normal "Black" greeting- THAT is racist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 28 Aug 13 - 03:27 PM I'm going to say one more thing here and then stop conversing with BB and GfS on this topic. It's ultra-clear to me that GZ attempted to detain TM until the police got there. There is evidence to support that. GZ's lies and inconsistencies back that up as well. GZ felt confident doing what he did because he had a gun to "protect" himself should TM resist. TM did resist (which he had every right to do). I will tell you folks that if some strange man without a badge stalked and then attempted to detain me, I would not submit, I would physically struggle- partly out of fear, partly out anger. GZ was looking for that physical struggle so he could justify shooting TM. One last note, GfS I'm beginning to see why Bobert and Don Firth think ill of you. You take them to task on issues, when quite frankly, you ought to know better. Other times you say good things but when you go on like this, it gets lost. This IS about race. I am a middle aged white woman. GZ would not have stalked and accosted me like he did TM. Because young black males had reportedly broken into homes in that neighborhood, GZ felt he had a right to play cop and treat any young black male as a suspect. He did not have that right except by Florida law- a very fucked up law that makes it possible to shoot someone in cold blood and get away with it. B & DF, ignore these guys. They just enjoy upsetting us on a topic which really does upset us- and rightly so... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:22 PM Excuse me, BullshitBobert deserves you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:16 PM So everything YOU AND BOBERT claim is also bullshit, since YOU have no evidence. You have denied the evidence, so you are just a racist liar. Bobert deserves you, asshole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:12 PM You still haven't provided any evidence whatsoeveer foryour horseshit, BullshitBruce. There's only two people that know what actually happened; one is conveniently dead, and the other has been proven a liar over and over again. So now, about that evidence, BullshitBruce........ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:31 PM And ANYONE, regardless of their "Street Cred", who advocates allowing the prosecution to withhold evidence from disclosure in order to get the verdict that they think should be made is just as bad as the KKK, in ignoring the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:25 PM And how do YOU explain an armed Neighborhood Watch man being on the ground, gun NOT in his hand, being beaten? I assume that YOU and Bobert lie, from past experience, but give others the benefit of the doubt and presume they are telling the truth unless I have reason BASED ON FACT to think otherwise. Now, please tell me what evidence there is that Zimmerman "Stalked" anyone? EVIDENCE, not Bobert's idea of what HE would have done. Your claim that ANYTHING is shit has yet to be suported by any factual basis. But it IS what I expect from the "Liberal" voice, uncontested, and accepted by the failure of other Liberals to indicate any disagreement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:24 PM Bottom line... Zimmerman is a liar... He lied about the money ha received from Gun-Wacko-Nation... He lied about not knowing about stand-your-ground laws in Florida after taking a class on it... Liars lie... Look at the cuts on his head... Anyone who has ever been in a real fight knows that if Martin was on top and was banging his head into the concrete that those tint little cuts would real cuts that would require stitches... Zimmerman lied about them... I'd bet that in order to make his story more believable that he banged his own head... Zimmerman say that he was the one screaming yet the screaming stopped right after the gunshot... Zimmerman lied about that, too... Zimmerman is a lying ass creepy racist ass hole and anyone defending him is, as well... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:03 PM No, BullshitBruce, learn to read. You apparently don't even understand what you write yourself. Let's try again. You wrote: "to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there." [emphasis mine] You can't provide proof for this because there is none. As usual. Just the same old horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 11:37 AM Where the prosecution witnesses say that Zimmerman was on the bottom screaming, with Martin on top beating him. Now, please tell me what evidence there is that Zimmerman "Stalked" anyone? EVIDENCE, not Bobert's idea of what HE would have done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:26 AM That's a smokescreen, not an answer, BullshitBruce. Where EXACTLY in the "evidence"[sic] is the confirmation of your statement? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:19 AM Just listen to the PROSECUTION witnesses. Oh, I forget- you "Liberals " can't be bothered listening to anyone who says something you might not agree with. What a shit-for-brain! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:14 AM Really, BullshitBruce ? to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there. And your proof of this is where in the evidence presented? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:00 AM And Bobert states that the court is wrong- JUST LIKE THE KKK. Hail Bobert, the Ubermensch! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:53 AM Armed white man stalks and then murders unarmed black teenager... That's the meat 'n taters here... Not all the twisted il-logic by the racists here and elsewhere or the right wing blog-o-poo'ers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:03 AM Were YOU, Greggie boy? I am using the EVIDENCE that the prosecution presented as a basis -WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU using to determine what happened? After all, since Martin was "Black, and (probably) a Democrat", YOU would have called him a "Dumb Ni**er" from the evidence of your previous posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 08:40 AM Vass you dere, BullshitBruce? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 08:26 AM No, Don T. Zimmerman THOUGHT that he was acting suspiciously ( as he stated on the 911 call, a FACT you ignore) and wanted to see what he was up to, like a NEIGHBORHOOD WATVH person should do WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE ACTING SUSPICIOUSLY. Zimmerman's choice to follow on foot was a poor decision- but not as poor as Martin's choice to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:17 AM ""And Zimmerman stated that he saw "someone acting suspicious, WHEN HE CALLED IN ON HIS CELL PHONE. The OPERATOR asked whether the person was white or black, and Zimmerman hesitated, and then said he thought he was black. NOT the reason he was watching him. NOT the reason he stopped him and asked what he was doing there. YOU are making it about him being black- that makes YOU the racist."" He thought he was black, and that is why he followed him and confronted him, because "everybody knows" all blacks on the street at night are muggers, burglars or drug dealers, RIGHT BB?. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:59 AM Saying it 10,000 times doesn't make what you're saying any truer, Goofball. Get real. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 11:14 PM That's right...Firth posts his reference source from another blog for wannabe 'so-called' liberals'..Give me a break!..No wonder your 'logic' is ridiculous!...Let's try this again: "It has NO bearing on the reality of the situation..it's just a trip they're on. It's 'fashionable' to their ideology!...which never seems to make sense, anyway." ..and if anyone else is taking them seriously, in regards to this matter, you might double check your skulls to see if it's leaking. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:42 PM Back in the 70s when it seemed I went weeks living in the black community I learned a book's full of knowledge about the black culture... One thing I learned is that there was city black folks and then there was rural black folks... Trayvon's parents represent rural black folks... Now lotta white folk going, "Well, is that so bad? I mean, these people seem very reasonable"... (And they are) What white folk don't get is that Trayvon's parents were playing the game they know... The rural black folk composure... Ya' see, it wasn't always like that... There were times when Trayvon would have been lynched... That's reality... Some things need to be kept in perspective... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:41 PM Racial prejudice, Jackie Robinson, Trayvon Martin and Sanford, Florida. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:14 PM It IS the reality of the situation, whether your prejudice allows you to see it or not. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 05:18 PM If Firth and Bobert WANT to believe that, just let them. It has NO bearing on the reality of the situation..it's just a trip they're on. It's 'fashionable' to their ideology!...which never seems to make sens, anyway. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 04:59 PM That, incidentally, was from a considerably longer interview with Trayvon Martin's mother. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 04:47 PM Yes, Bill, she said that. "Race did play an issue. But we didn't make it a race issue." [Emphasis mine--DF] The family didn't want to make a race issue of it, probably knowing that, in that locality, it would be fruitless. In fact, it could have easily stirred up more racial troubles--in a community with a long history of racial troubles (See baseball player Jackie Robinson in relation to Sanford, Florida). Would Zimmerman have acted the way he did if he had seen a white kid walking down the street with a bag of candy and a cup of iced tea? I doubt it very seriously. Don Firth |
