Charles Barkley: Zimmer was right to be acquitted

[QUOTE=LJJ]Isn't this the transcript: [url]http://www.motherjones.com/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman[/url]

I don't see Zimmerman saying he's pursuing Martin. Shocking that you actually believe Zimmerman said that on the tape, this is how your mind plays tricks on you.[/QUOTE]

Zimmerman even gets out of his truck at one point (when he says "sh*t he's running") and starts running after him.. You can tell he is [B]pursuing[/B] him.. Even the dispatcher notices it... Is that not pursuit? Or is that only "following" :oldlol:

[QUOTE=Nanners]"race" is kind of a strange idea. humans are the only species where individuals with phenotypic differences get called different "races". with other animals such as cats and dogs, we refer to phenotype differences as "breeds".

other than the color, is there any difference between a black cat and a white cat?[/QUOTE]

IDGAF about cats, but different breeds of dogs certainly have different temperaments and traits. Some dogs, like pit bulls, are more aggressive and violent while others are more docile. Some are generally smarter than others.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]Zimmerman even gets out of his truck at one point (when he says "sh*t he's running") and starts running after him.. You can tell he is [B]pursuing[/B] him.. Even the dispatcher notices it... Is that not pursuit? Or is that only "following" :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

Just a minute ago you were absolutely convinced Zimmerman said on the tape he was pursuing Martin. Now confronted with the facts you are changing your story to fit around them.

Which is a perfect example what you have been doing with every single fact you've been faced with since the start of this story. You have such a closed mind. Your mind has been made up ever since you read the first headline, let's be honest here.

[QUOTE=dude77]what are you referring to .. the skull shapes ? .. that's a fact .. this isn't speculation .. I'm talking about pure breeds .. not mixed people[/QUOTE]

It's not a fact. If it were a fact, then every "pure breed" would have consistent skull sizes. There would be no exceptions. However, there are exceptions.

Please, if you have any empirical evidence, show it to me.

[QUOTE=chosen_one6]It's not a fact. If it were a fact, then every "pure breed" would have consistent skull sizes. There would be no exceptions. However, there are exceptions.

Please, if you have any empirical evidence, show it to me.[/QUOTE]

there's always going to be some variations .. but those clear differences in skull shapes exist

[QUOTE=dude77]what are you referring to .. the skull shapes ? .. that's a fact .. this isn't speculation .. I'm talking about pure breeds .. not mixed people[/QUOTE]


Bogus....there is no scientific " facts" showing minor diffrencies amongst species means anything...

" Skull sizes?"...that's like saying Polynesians have diffrent "stomach sizes?"...

- yeah they have bigger stomachs.....it means nothing.....just like if someone is shorter or taller.....it means nothing.

- Skull size , stomach size , Brain size ( has no bearing on IQ), Leg size.....all mean absolutley nothing!

- According to science....there are no " races"...just minor cosmetic difference among 1 species...( that can change very easily)

Just like the GZ trial...there are FACTS....and there are hear say.


Iam going with my expierience backed up by the Facts/Science......

[QUOTE=LJJ]Just a minute ago you were absolutely convinced Zimmerman said on the tape he was pursuing Martin. Now confronted with the facts you are changing your story to fit around them.

Which is a perfect example what you have been doing with every single fact you've been faced with since the start of this story. You have such a closed mind. Your mind has been made up ever since you read the first headline, let's be honest here.[/QUOTE]


Like I already said you are playing a weak semantics game...

George Zimmerman [B]pursues [/B]trayvon and even admits it on the tape..The dispatch asks him and he admits it... he even chases him at one point

There is no evidence that trayvon ever pursued Zimmerman...

You can nitpick the words if you want but it is a silly distinction to try and make and as usual you are wasting space and time..

[QUOTE=dude77]there's always going to be some variations .. but those clear differences in skull shapes exist[/QUOTE]

I asked you to show me evidence and you give me nothing. Read this article:

[URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/01/alas_poor_yorick_or_is_it_othello.html"]http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/01/alas_poor_yorick_or_is_it_othello.html[/URL]

And trust me, there are many more like it debunking your claim.

pur

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]Like I already said you are playing a weak semantics game...

George Zimmerman [B]pursues [/B]trayvon and even admits it on the tape..The dispatch asks him and he admits it... he even chases him at one point

There is no evidence that trayvon ever pursued Zimmerman...

You can nitpick the words if you want but it is a silly distinction to try and make and as usual you are wasting space and time..[/QUOTE]

Everybody reads in college about confirmation bias, but it's so weird to see it practiced in real life with such vehemence.

"No he DID say he was pursuing Martin. I don't care if it's not on the tape, I KNOW this happened." Lol. okayyy

[QUOTE=dude77]pur

[QUOTE=LJJ]Everybody reads in college about confirmation bias, but it's so weird to see it practiced in real life with such vehemence.

"No he DID say he was pursuing Martin. I don't care if it's not on the tape, I KNOW this happened." Lol. okayyy[/QUOTE]


"Hehe he didnt actullay say the word "pursue" gotcha hehe" :facepalm jesus christ



like I said... There is no evidence that Trayvon pursued Zimmerman..But there is evidence of Zimmerman pursuing trayvon.. If you wanna nitpick the words (follow vs pursue), I wont waste time with you Because it is a silly argument designed to distract from the point.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]exactly and that is racial profiling.. The profile of the criminal is a black person... Just like the profile of the terrorist is muslim..

so you suspect Muslims/Blacks because the people who did the crime were black/muslim too.[/QUOTE]


Racial profiling is based solely on race. It doesn't take into account anything other than race. Age, height, weight, facial hair, clothing, etc don't matter.

GZ was looking specifically for a black TEEN, not a 30, 40, or 50 year old black man. Not a fat black man or a black man with braids...

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]He could have kept "track" of him in the car... He was warned not to "track" "pursue" "follow" "chase" trayvon martin and he did it anyway..

If he listens? no one gets killed that night.. That is the point..

Nothing happens if George listens to the advice of the dispatch officer[/QUOTE]

gz was under no obligation to stay in his car .. none ..

why does everyone keep saying that shit ? he was in his own fkn neighborhood ..

gz wasn't looking for a fight .. and you all now that .. tm however .. well he liked to 'make em bleed'

[QUOTE=LJJ]To pursue someone means you have the intent to catch or attack them. Zimmerman never said he was doing that, he said he was following Martin. [B]Martin is the one who initiated a violent confrontation.[/B]


It's really quite worrysome that you would misrepresent the facts like that in your head. Zimmerman was pursuing Martin now, by his own account. That's what you actually make yourself believe.[/QUOTE]


How exactly do you know Martin is the one who initiated the violent confrontation? Just because he was kicking GZ's ass doesn't mean he initiated it.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]Bogus....there is no scientific " facts" showing minor diffrencies amongst species means anything...

" Skull sizes?"...that's like saying Polynesians have diffrent "stomach sizes?"...

- yeah they have bigger stomachs.....it means nothing.....just like if someone is shorter or taller.....it means nothing.

- Skull size , stomach size , Brain size ( has no bearing on IQ), Leg size.....all mean absolutley nothing!

- According to science....there are no " races"...just minor cosmetic difference among 1 species...( that can change very easily)

Just like the GZ trial...there are FACTS....and there are hear say.


Iam going with my expierience backed up by the Facts/Science......[/QUOTE]
if you really want to bring science in to it, modern taxonomy classifies animals with very small differences as different species on a regular basis. it's pretty common.

a slightly different color pattern, a small difference in skeleton or organ size, whatever. i believe the reason this is usually done is to differentiate groups of animals that have split apart by region. it is probably expected that they will continue to drift genetically.. hence a reason in calling them a different species. in fact it would be impossible for them to develop back in to a single species if there wasn't some event which caused the groups to mix back together again. even so, the number of species would usually splinter further i would think.

but, yea... you are certainly right that it doesn't mean they can't interbreed. many such animals are functionally the same species.

of course a lion and a tiger can also mate, sometimes or usually. so the genetic differences can be pretty severe, as well.

i think even science has the common sense not to do the usual reclassification thing with humans, however.

i'm an amateur zoologist, but there are some people here... maybe deucewallaces, shakehandlover or various lurkers that could explain better.

[QUOTE=tontoz]Racial profiling is based solely on race. It doesn't take into account anything other than race. Age, height, weight, facial hair, clothing, etc don't matter.

GZ was looking specifically for a black TEEN, not a 30, 40, or 50 year old black man. Not a fat black man or a black man with braids...[/QUOTE]

its not always solely based on race.. its based primarily on race..

cant tell if trayvon has braids when he has a hoodie on

anyway who is to say whether or not zimmerman follows taryvon if he is 30, 40, or 50 :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=ace23]AlphaWolf said there's no such thing as race, though. Either way, he's wrong.[/QUOTE]


[B]Race is a Modern Idea[/B] - Ancient Civilizations did not divide people based on appearance....but by Class, Religion and even language

[B]Race has no genetic basis[/B] - Not one charistic, gene or physical marker distinguishes one so called ( made up) Race from another

[B]Humans are 1 species[/B] - Modern Humans have not been around long enough to evolve subspecies or races...Despite minor surface diffrences...we are teh most similar of all species.

[B]Skin color is only skin deep [/B]- Traits are inherited seperatley....the gene for skin color has no bearing on hair color , eye color , blood type or physical ability....etc..etc

[B]Most "Variation" is within...not between "races"[/B] - of the small human genetic variation....85% of it exists within the local population....2 random Koreans are as likley to be genetically diffrent as a Korean and an Italian...

[B]Race is a made up social construct to catagorize humans based of Minor phyical diffrences[/B] - Racism is real.....[B]Race[/B] is a made up / barbaric way to find seperation.....

it does not exist......


might as well say ...." well he is tall.......Tall people are a differnt Race"




:pimp: ( thumps chest)




next

[QUOTE=dude77]gz was under no obligation to stay in his car .. none ..

why does everyone keep saying that shit ? he was in his own fkn neighborhood[/quote]


Nobody said he is "obligated" I said he was "warned" not to follow the kid and he did it anyway...

he could have "tracked" him from the truck and let the police handle it from there.. It would have been the smart thing thing to do.. That is why he was advised NOT to follow him..



[quote]gz wasn't looking for a fight .. and you all now that .. tm however .. well he liked to 'make em bleed'[/QUOTE]


evidently George like to "make em bleed" too.. only difference is he needs a gun to do it..

If you look at the law and the jury instruction...the verdict was correct. There was reasonable doubt and it isn't really arguable to reasonable people.

It's sad seeing normally sane people turn into lunatics when race is involved. Really, someone explain to me how there was no reasonable doubt.

[QUOTE=gigantes]if you really want to bring science in to it, modern taxonomy classifies animals with very small differences as different species on a regular basis. it's pretty common.

a slightly different color pattern, [B]a small difference in skeleton or organ size, whatever.[/B] i believe the reason this is usually done is to differentiate groups of animals that have split apart by region. it is probably expected that they will continue to drift genetically.. hence a reason in calling them a different species. in fact it would be impossible for them to develop back in to a single species if there wasn't some event which caused the groups to mix back together again. even so, the number of species would usually splinter further i would think.

but, yea... you are certainly right that it doesn't mean they can't interbreed. many such animals are functionally the same species.

of course a lion and a tiger can also mate, sometimes or usually. so the genetic differences can be pretty severe, as well.

i think even science has the common sense not to do the usual reclassification thing with humans, however.

i'm an amateur zoologist, but there are some people here... maybe deucewallaces, shakehandlover or various lurkers that could explain better.[/QUOTE]


I have to look more into taxidermy....:confusedshrug:

[QUOTE]might as well say ...." well he is tall.......Tall people are a differnt Race"[/QUOTE]

Humans don't catagorize skeloton size as a diffrent species though...

[QUOTE=IGOTGAME]If you look at the law and the jury instruction...the verdict was correct. There was reasonable doubt and it isn't really arguable to reasonable people.

It's sad seeing normally sane people turn into lunatics when race is involved. Really, someone explain to me how there was no reasonable doubt.[/QUOTE]


I think you are right... I have been on a few juries and the jury instruction can be very narrow...

I personally think manslaughter would be the proper judgement, but after seeing the jury instruction and seeing the state's case, I cant be mad at the jury..

I think the law needs to be specified or modified

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I have been on a few juries[/QUOTE]

Doubtful. Your radical black supremacy viewpoints would be instantly picked up on and rule you out of any jury pool.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]I have to look more into taxidermy....:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
taxonomy, meaning classification. taxidermy is just the preservation of specimens.

here's an example, if it helps-- the common box turtle.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrapene_carolina[/url]


my point is, if scientists wanted to treat modern humans as with all other animals, they could easily classify mongoloid, cauc, negroid, aboriginal australian as legit subspecies. maybe not separate species, but separate subspecies. there are more than anything shared differences to do so.

they don't hesitate for a moment to do so with extinct humans, but probably have enough sense to let it go as "race" with h. sapiens sapiens.

again, that's my working understanding, subject to clarification.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24][B]Race is a Modern Idea[/B] - Ancient Civilizations did not divide people based on appearance....but by Class, Religion and even language

[B]Race has no genetic basis[/B] - Not one charistic, gene or physical marker distinguishes one so called ( made up) Race from another

[B]Humans are 1 species[/B] - Modern Humans have not been around long enough to evolve subspecies or races...Despite minor surface diffrences...we are teh most similar of all species.

[B]Skin color is only skin deep [/B]- Traits are inherited seperatley....the gene for skin color has no bearing on hair color , eye color , blood type or physical ability....etc..etc

[B]Most "Variation" is within...not between "races"[/B] - of the small human genetic variation....85% of it exists within the local population....2 random Koreans are as likley to be genetically diffrent as a Korean and an Italian...

[B]Race is a made up social construct to catagorize humans based of Minor phyical diffrences[/B] - Racism is real.....[B]Race[/B] is a made up / barbaric way to find seperation.....

it does not exist......


might as well say ...." well he is tall.......Tall people are a differnt Race"




:pimp: ( thumps chest)




next[/QUOTE]


:cheers:

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]its not always solely based on race.. its based primarily on race..

cant tell if trayvon has braids when he has a hoodie on

anyway who is to say whether or not zimmerman follows taryvon if he is 30, 40, or 50 :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]


We don't know what he would have done. We do know that if he followed an old black man he would be racial profiling. He would only be following because of race, not because he fit the description of the person invading homes.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]
[B]Skin color is only skin deep [/B]- Traits are inherited seperatley....the gene for skin color has no bearing on hair color , eye color , blood type or physical ability....etc..etc

[/QUOTE]


Are you trying to say the hair is the same for blacks and whites? How many black people are natural blondes? :oldlol:

Why are so many NBA players black if there are no differences between races' physical abilities?

[QUOTE=tontoz]We don't know what he would have done. We do know that if he followed an old black man he would be racial profiling. He would only be following because of race, not because he fit the description of the person invading homes.[/QUOTE]


like I said earlier.. Race as the KEY factor makes it racial profiling... If you say "black youths" vs "black elderly men" :confusedshrug:

black is the key factor

[quote]Any police-initiated action that relies on the race, ethnicity, or national origin rather than the behavior of an individual or information that leads the police to a particular individual who has been identified as being, or having been, engaged in criminal activity." -Deborah Ramirez, Jack McDevitt, Amy Farrell for US [/quote]

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_profiling[/url]

If age is the key factor? it would still be a form of profiling, just not by race..

the fact that these criminals were supposedly Black is the key factor by everyone's account.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]like I said earlier.. Race as the KEY factor makes it racial profiling... If you say "black youths" vs "black elderly men" :confusedshrug:

black is the key factor[/QUOTE]

Well, we can't know that race was the key factor in Zimmerman's mind. Looking from the outside in it might appear that way, but Zimmerman didn't bring up race on the call until he was specifically asked by the dispatcher. And in the tone of his voice he sounds uncertain when he first answers.

7:09:59 PM [B]Dispatch[/B]: "OK, and this guy

can somebody comment on how the jury instruction 'systematically excluded racism' from the proceedings that i've heard so much about? mostly a unilateral decision by the judge yea? thats the big point the naacp is making anyway, along with a few other gruops and outspoken critics. jus curious about what specific charges could have been made by the prosecution that could have led to a conviction, would they just fall under some standard state hate crime law or what, etc

[QUOTE=The Real JW]Well, we can't know that race was the key factor in Zimmerman's mind. Looking from the outside in it might appear that way, but Zimmerman didn't bring up race on the call until he was specifically asked by the dispatcher. And in the tone of his voice he sounds uncertain when he first answers.

7:09:59 PM [B]Dispatch[/B]: "OK, and this guy— is he white, black, or Hispanic?"
7:10:02 PM [B]Zimmerman[/B]: "He [I]looks[/I] black." [COLOR="Red"](unsure tone)[/COLOR]
7:10:04 PM [B]Dispatch[/B]: "Did you see what he was wearing?"
...[COLOR="Red"] (a few moments later, Trayvon walks closer and George gets a better view of him)[/COLOR]
7:10:32 PM [B]Zimmerman[/B]: "Yeah, now he's coming towards me."
7:10:33 PM [B]Dispatch[/B]: "OK."
7:10:37 PM [B]Zimmerman[/B]: "He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male." [COLOR="Red"](confirming his initial assumption to the dispatcher)[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

"unsure tone"??



the red is basically your interpretation of Zimmerman's words.. The people defending Zimmerman's actions keep bringing the "blacks" who committed crimes in the area.. That is racial profiling if his defenders are to be believed..

[QUOTE=RidonKs]can somebody comment on how the jury instruction 'systematically excluded racism' from the proceedings that i've heard so much about? mostly a unilateral decision by the judge yea? thats the big point the naacp is making anyway, along with a few other gruops and outspoken critics. jus curious about what specific charges could have been made by the prosecution that could have led to a conviction, would they just fall under some standard state hate crime law or what, etc[/QUOTE]


from what I read, it was stipulated that the prosecution couldnt use the term "racial" profiling.. They could say zimmerman profiled him.

I also think the prosecution decided they werent gonna mention the race angle anyway.. Some of them said it would have turned the jury off..

Maybe they are right :confusedshrug:

I dont think there is enough evidence to prove a hate crime.. Maybe the feds can do a civil rights case... but I dont see where there is a hate crime case

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]"unsure tone"??

the red is basically your interpretation of Zimmerman's words.. The people defending Zimmerman's actions keep bringing the "blacks" who committed crimes in the area.. That is racial profiling if his defenders are to be believed..[/QUOTE]

You don't hear the tone of his voice I'm talking about when he says that? If he were certain about Trayvon's race when the dispatcher first asks him, I think he would have just said "Yeah, he's black." and wouldn't need to volunteer that a second time later in the call in apparent confirmation.

I just personally haven't seen any actual evidence that this specific incident was motivated by race. For either of the two parties involved. Some people say that Trayvon saying "creepy ass cracker" is evidence of race being on his mind, and I disagree there too. I think race has been injected into this by external parties, largely the media.

To bona fide racists like Rasheed, everything is about race. Everything boils down to race.

[QUOTE]from what I read, it was stipulated that the prosecution couldnt use the term "racial" profiling.. They could say zimmerman profiled him.

I also think the prosecution decided they werent gonna mention the race angle anyway.. Some of them said it would have turned the jury off..[/QUOTE]
huh. i guess i just dont see how even demonstrating zimmerman's racial motives would have any bearing on the jury's verdict considering the reasoning behind it and the charges they went after. could the naacp just be making a big deal out of nothing?? lol

maybe theres a more substantive argument im missing here

[QUOTE=RidonKs]could the naacp just be making a big deal out of nothing??[/QUOTE]

Shocker.

[QUOTE=The Real JW]You don't hear the tone of his voice I'm talking about when he says that? If he were certain about Trayvon's race when the dispatcher first asks him, I think he would have just said "Yeah, he's black." and wouldn't need to volunteer that a second time later in the call in apparent confirmation.

I just personally haven't seen any actual evidence that this specific incident was motivated by race. For either of the two parties involved. Some people say that Trayvon saying "creepy ass cracker" is evidence of race being on his mind, and I disagree there too. I think race has been injected into this by external parties, largely the media.[/QUOTE]


I would agree with you partially... I think all the side "evidence" if you wanna call it that contributes to the notions that people have..

There are stories of how zimmerman's family behaves (and it is corroborated by some of the comments his dad makes and his brother too).. There is the stories about Zimmerman calling the dispatch hundreds of times..always when he sees black males.. One as young as 9 years old..

If you look simply at the the evidence allowed into the trial, then there isnt enough to say he did anything specifically based on race.. I personally think it is obvious, but that is my opinion.. I can also see that there is nothing solid enough to point to.. You can infer what he meant by "f*cking punks they always get away" but you cannot be certain..

its one of the reasons he was found not guilty, because the evidence is a bit too vague to believe beyond a reasonable doubt.

[QUOTE=RidonKs]huh. i guess i just dont see how even demonstrating zimmerman's racial motives would have any bearing on the jury's verdict considering the reasoning behind it and the charges they went after. could the naacp just be making a big deal out of nothing?? lol

maybe theres a more substantive argument im missing here[/QUOTE]


I think it is water under the bridge at this point..... the prosecution made their decision on how they would approach the case and they pursued the way they felt was best. Considering the evidence they put forth and jury they had? I think leaning on the race angle too heavily would have been a bad idea..

I think they could have done more in other areas to prove zimmerman's story was a crock, but they failed, and he walks..

the public has to simply live with it..

The media doctored 911 tapes and pictures to create public outcry. The real trayvon Martin, the so-called child who was suspended 10 days from school for being in possesion of stolen jewelery and burglary tools, has been exposed. rest in Peace. Possession is 9/10 of the Law. The first thing trayvons lawyer did was to file a junction to seal trayvons school records. Smart lawyer...

[IMG]http://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/trayvonmartin_doctoredphoto.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]the red is basically your interpretation of Zimmerman's words.. The people defending Zimmerman's actions keep bringing the "blacks" who committed crimes in the area.. That is racial profiling if his defenders are to be believed..[/QUOTE]


I understand peoples' issues with profiling and all that and I know it goes on however ..

if the neighborhood is being terrorized and the perps doing the terrorizing have all been black .. don't you think it's normal to take notice if you see a drugged up, hoodied black guy standing in front of a house that was recently targeted ? ..

I mean if you tell me the neighborhood was being terrorized by a bunch of white boys and he's here taking notice of this black kid then I would be more inclined to see the side of the 'racial profiling' crowd .. not in this case though