I see there are protests out there today seeking "justice for Trayvon". Can anyone tell me what that would mean at this point? What is realitic, fair and legal?
Printable View
I see there are protests out there today seeking "justice for Trayvon". Can anyone tell me what that would mean at this point? What is realitic, fair and legal?
It just got the media whores some more attention. Frankly, I think there are some on the left who would be more than happy to see a lynching - of GZ. They pushed for this to go to trial, it did, and they can't stomach that the outcome wasn't in their "favor."
Protestors in Houston earlier in the week, blocking traffic on the freeway, delayed a family getting to the hospital for a 7 year old girl's allergic reaction to medication. http://www.click2houston.com/news/lo...h/-/index.html
All that's happening is these "leaders" are whipping people up into a frenzy. People are going to get hurt as a response, more crimes committed, etc.
When AG Holder spoke earlier in the week, he was going on and on about the SYG laws. These arrgghhh <insert frustration> conveniently ignore that the SYG law was not brought up in the GZ case.
I agree. At this point, justice has nothing to do with it. I can understand people letting their emotions rule their behavior, but to have that behavior encouraged by the President and Attorney General of the United States is beyond the pale. If they want to inflame racial grievance while simultaneously pushing an agenda, they are doing a great dis-service to their respective offices and the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tradd
For all those who use race as their preferred basis of reasoning, color me disappointed.
Yes, for the Prez and AG to get into this such as they did - not good.
Well obviously there can be a civil trail, I don't know that that's particularly controversial, yes it was done for OJ. Other than that though, no I don't think anything can and should be done about that particular case. Because it seems to me doing so would be double jeopardy. Yea, the protections against double jeopardy are way too important, much more important than any given case. So nothing can or should be done.Quote:
I see there are protests out there today seeking "justice for Trayvon". Can anyone tell me what that would mean at this point? What is realitic, fair and legal?
That said there seems to be questions about some (or at least one) of the jurors and whether or not the effort was really made to find an impartial jury. I do not think the case should be thrown out on those grounds because at this point the whole thing is too political to even arrive at the right answer. Hint: the *right* answer is *procedural* - were the proper procedures followed in conducting the trial to impartially decide as best as possible based on the existing law (unless you want to jury nullify an existing law :)). The *right* answer doesn't even exist in terms of results. Well it might, but that's moral or in some's views God's justice, not man's state administered criminal justice system - a system that always gives the morally right result is nothing you can implement in human laws or would even want to.
Sure the media whipped up a bit of a frenzy, covered the case beyond extensively (at least some outlets), but that same media is the one that tells you all the protest are so bad! That is them whipping the horrified newswatchers into a frenzy about protestors (if you believe only minorities can be manipulated better look at those assumptions). It's often a lie. You better double confirm that allergic girl story, it could be true, it could not. The media seems to have OUTRIGHT LIED (or not checked their sources if you are generous) about hotel damage in Hollywood for instance:
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/16/new_...owdy_protests/
Anyway, I accept that protest will cause some disruption of normal life and I am more than ok with protest in general. Like imperfect jury verdicts it's the price you pay for a living in a (hardly at all at this point but still a little) free society. I'm not sympathetic to never wanting to pay it. The purpose of this particular protests may seem a waste of time (I personally do not view overturning jury verdicts as a road we should even conceive of taking!). But it also may be about much larger issues (overall functioning of the criminal justice system in terms of race etc. etc.).
This whole topic was much too hot and I only dare to get into this thread now - totally get why people wanted no part of this thread and left it! Reports of quite significant (shutting down freeways is not insignificant by any measure) protests to a jury verdict and stuff *scared* me initially! Straight up scared by what I don't understand. The right was jubilant about the trial outcome, the left including many I often agree with seemed to want a criminal system that would delivery perfect result justice (pardon but I think that road leads nowhere good at all). I sat back, shut up, and reflected a bit - through all emotional reactivity - my ideas may not have changed much but just context and stuff.
I get that there may be broader social issues. If handled better by our "leaders" there could have been a teachable moment in there somewhere. Just seems to me they have the wrong vehicle for their issues and it is becoming counter productive.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
I do not know if justice for Trayvon means Zimmerman fries, but as with any event like the Martin case, it means lots of people looking at what they believe to be contributing factors which results in:Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
*"conversations" about race ad naseum--The President of the U.S. spoke today
* examining laws or lack of them, in this case Florida's "Stand Your Ground" is a whipping boy although as Yosarrian pointed out, it wasn't part of the trial
* easy access to guns always the problems with some people
I think it's fine that people spend their energy looking at these societal issues, better than stringing up white Hispanic George Zimmermann.