Why is George Zimmerman allowed to roam free tonight?

Jayhawker wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

The distinction doesn't really change much here, but I'm horrified that this kind of 'transcript' may be the norm.

This does not sound like a pet peeve.

Something that bothers me greatly that doesn't bother most people... define pet peeve? Maybe I'm using the term incorrectly. Seriously.
Look at it from an intelligence gathering perspective. On the one hand we have claims that a 'code' was used to disguise the actual numbers being discussed. Then the transcript altered the actual words used into the values possibly represented by any number of words. Now assume that someone used even a slightly smarter code than these two yahoos. Dollar for thousands. Dollars for millions. In this output it would all be condensed to $ and the coded significance lost for the sake of expediency.

Something that bothers me greatly that doesn't bother most people... define pet peeve? Maybe I'm using the term incorrectly. Seriously.

A pet peeve is something you find annoying that doesn't bother other people but that you also recognize isn't of great importance.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

A pet peeve is something you find annoying that doesn't bother other people but that you also recognize isn't of great importance.

Hmm... That last clause seems suspect but I still think the term applies. If you note my use of horrifying wasn't aimed at the actual practice or even the case here, but that this method of 'transcription' might be considered standard practice in all situations, including those where an accurate representation of nuance could actually matter.
/Derail

Rezzy wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

A pet peeve is something you find annoying that doesn't bother other people but that you also recognize isn't of great importance.

Hmm... That last clause seems suspect but I still think the term applies. If you note my use of horrifying wasn't aimed at the actual practice or even the case here, but that this method of 'transcription' might be considered standard practice in all situations, including those where an accurate representation of nuance could actually matter.
/Derail

The would be reason for concern is if lawyers and judges did not understand how transcription works or how to read it based on agreed upon standards.

Malor wrote:

From what I saw on MeFi, this is not at all true. This is spin by the prosecution.

Think about it. You're talking with your wife. She asks you how much you have in an account with a lot of money in it. You don't say, "it has one hundred and fifty five thousand, six hundred twelve dollars, and thirty sex cents." You say "one fifty five" or "a hundred and fifty five". This is not code, this how people normally talk about large sums of anything.

Now, if she actually said "one hundred and fifty five dollars", then yes, it was code, but it's my understanding from that MeFi comment that this was not the case.

Yes, edit out all the dates to make it sound like a perfectly reasonable excuse.

On June 15 & 16 Shellie Zimmerman spoke with her husband at jail where she was recorded saying they had $155 when it's now known they had $155,000.

On June 16, 17, 18, & 19 Shellie Zimmerman moved $74,000 from George Zimmerman's accounts to her accounts through eight separate transfers, all of which were coincidentally just under the $10,000 amount that would require reporting the transaction.

On June 20 Shellie Zimmerman testified under oath at George Zimmerman's bail hearing that 1) the couple had no real assets to speak of, 2) that they were "essentially destitute", and 3) that she had absolutely no idea how much money had been raised for Zimmerman through the web site he put up.

Unless Shellie Zimmerman is a fantastic day trader who can turn $155 into $74,000 in just a day or two, she knowingly lied under oath and fully deserves to have the book throw at her.

OG_slinger wrote:
Malor wrote:

From what I saw on MeFi, this is not at all true. This is spin by the prosecution.

Think about it. You're talking with your wife. She asks you how much you have in an account with a lot of money in it. You don't say, "it has one hundred and fifty five thousand, six hundred twelve dollars, and thirty sex cents." You say "one fifty five" or "a hundred and fifty five". This is not code, this how people normally talk about large sums of anything.

Now, if she actually said "one hundred and fifty five dollars", then yes, it was code, but it's my understanding from that MeFi comment that this was not the case.

Yes, edit out all the dates to make it sound like a perfectly reasonable excuse.

On June 15 & 16 Shellie Zimmerman spoke with her husband at jail where she was recorded saying they had $155 when it's now known they had $155,000.

On June 16, 17, 18, & 19 Shellie Zimmerman moved $74,000 from George Zimmerman's accounts to her accounts through eight separate transfers, all of which were coincidentally just under the $10,000 amount that would require reporting the transaction.

On June 20 Shellie Zimmerman testified under oath at George Zimmerman's bail hearing that 1) the couple had no real assets to speak of, 2) that they were "essentially destitute", and 3) that she had absolutely no idea how much money had been raised for Zimmerman through the web site he put up.

Unless Shellie Zimmerman is a fantastic day trader who can turn $155 into $74,000 in just a day or two, she knowingly lied under oath and fully deserves to have the book throw at her.

I'm open to the idea that June 15th was a misunderstanding but when you include the June 20th testimony that goes out the window. Specifically transferring under 10,000 is a dead giveaway you're trying to hide something.

I feel like looking at all of this evidence and thinking anything else could be happening is just trying to be contrarian for the sake of it.

SixteenBlue wrote:

I feel like looking at all of this evidence and thinking anything else could be happening is just trying to be contrarian for the sake of it.

Especially if you read the probable cause document Dimmer linked to and hear Zimmerman tell his wife to pay the bondsman $50 or that he's concerned about his wife's safety for having around $15 in cash on hand.

Huh, I'm gonna have to go look to see which MeFi commenter misled me. I was fed very bad info.

I haven't seen a tremendous amount of detail about the policework involved but the tone of the articles about the Texas father beating the dude to death who was molesting his daughter seem to indicate that proper police procedure is being followed. This whole case would be a non-starter if the cops did their jobs.

A Sanford, FL judge ordered the release of some crime scene photos today. Martin's autopsy report, details of what Zimmerman said the night of the killing, and some other information is also set to be released to the public.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justic...

George Zimmerman failed to identify himself twice during a confrontation with Trayvon Martin and missed opportunities to defuse the situation that led to the death of the teen, a detective says in a newly released report.

...

The revelation is part of information Florida prosecutors released Tuesday. It includes a previously undisclosed portion of a video of Zimmerman showing injuries he said he suffered in the altercation with Martin.

"Marginally consistent" sounds like "I don't really think it is but I can't prove it's not" but maybe I just hear what I want to hear.

It's what I hear too.

You remember that picture that folks were circulating about a supposed shirtless Trayvon Martin flashing the double middle finger? Yeah. Turns out to be a fake perpetrated by the neo-nazi organization Stormfront.

Link to article

Great. This country is filled with assholes.

Paleocon wrote:

You remember that picture that folks were circulating about a supposed shirtless Trayvon Martin flashing the double middle finger? Yeah. Turns out to be a fake perpetrated by the neo-nazi organization Stormfront.

Link to article

Great. This country is filled with assholes.

Oh wow that's been known for months? I had no idea.

You mean this one?

rosenhane wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:

Exactly. This proves he's in high school? Cool.

I'm guessing it is to show that Martin wasn't the stereotypical "innocent child", and that he was actually a criminal.

I do wonder though if this had been the images we saw at first would we be thinking differently about this case
IMAGE(http://cdn3.thomhartmann.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/member-blog-small/george-zimmerman_trayvon-martin_media-bias.jpeg)

ClockworkHouse wrote:

You mean this one?

rosenhane wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:

Exactly. This proves he's in high school? Cool.

I'm guessing it is to show that Martin wasn't the stereotypical "innocent child", and that he was actually a criminal.

I do wonder though if this had been the images we saw at first would we be thinking differently about this case
IMAGE(http://cdn3.thomhartmann.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/member-blog-small/george-zimmerman_trayvon-martin_media-bias.jpeg)

Yup. That one.

Now I would like to think that most of the folks that circulated that picture did so without knowing that it was deliberate lie perpetrated by genocidal fcuktards, but it still doesn't make me feel much better about the state of American race relations when folks could be so easily duped and/or that their underlying bigotry only takes the slightest amount of scratching to bring to the surface.

People suck ass.

I don't think anyone here is saying that Zimmerman was a racist, as in the Stormfront morons, but race very much played a part in why he killed Martin.

From the article you linked to:

"Serino believed that Zimmerman's actions were not based on Martin's skin color (but) rather based on his attire," according to a report.

Serino told investigators that members of local gangs, who called themselves "Goons," frequently wore "hoodies," or hooded sweatshirts, and he believed Zimmerman "took it upon himself to view Martin as acting suspicious."

Do you really believe that Zimmerman only saw the hoodie and not Martin's skin color? That simply doesn't hold up, especially considering that gangs aren't exactly the United Colors of Benetton. They tend to group around race.

And besides that hoodies are exceptionally popular articles of clothing. Practically everyone wears them. So it couldn't have just been the hoodie that made Zimmerman think that Martin was suspicious otherwise Zimmerman would have found every teenager in America suspicious.

It was the combination of Martin being a young black man who was wearing a hoodie that made him suspicious to Zimmerman.

I mean lets not forget those earlier articles I linked to earlier that detailed how Zimmerman noted that it was young black men who were responsible for the recent crimes in the neighborhood (and the reason the so-called neighborhood watch program was started).

Well, at least he isn't a racist violent holster-sniffing megalomaniac.

Again, Martin being a racist isn't the important thing here.

It's the police being racist.

This case matters because of the POLICE response, or, rather, lack thereof. What Martin did was terrible, and he should probably be jailed for it. But it's only national news because of the POLICE, so talking about Martin's racism or lack thereof is a distraction from the true wrongs done in this case.

Malor wrote:

Again, Martin being a racist isn't the important thing here.

It's the police being racist.

This case matters because of the POLICE response, or, rather, lack thereof. What Martin did was terrible, and he should probably be jailed for it. But it's only national news because of the POLICE, so talking about Martin's racism or lack thereof is a distraction from the true wrongs done in this case.

Exactly this.

I also think it is of particular interest because of the lengths folks seem to be going to to portray Zimmerman as the victim here.

What do we know about Martin? He was suspended from school. He had a couple suspensions that were weed related. He was found in possession of women's jewelry (none of which matched the description of anything reported stolen). He had no history of violence unless playing high school football qualifies.

What do we know about Zimmerman? He was arrested for violently assaulting a police officer. He was served with court papers for domestic violence. He deliberately lied about his financial resources and his passport status to an officer of the court.

Take color and the hoodie out of this and it's pretty clear where we should be looking for the wrongdoing.

So now there's this:

A female relative accused George Zimmerman, charged in the murder of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, of sexually molesting her from age 6 to 16, according to new documents made public on Monday by prosecutors.

Not a racist, but maybe a pedophile.

muttonchop wrote:

So now there's this:

A female relative accused George Zimmerman, charged in the murder of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, of sexually molesting her from age 6 to 16, according to new documents made public on Monday by prosecutors.

Not a racist, but maybe a pedophile.

And wholly irrelevant to the case at hand. I think the guy should do some jail time, but I hate this kind of nonsense.

Yeah not every person on trial needs to be Aku. This would be our culture's desire to think in opposites. we are good and Zimmerman is eeeevilll. Just clouds it even more than it needs to be.

Atras wrote:
muttonchop wrote:

So now there's this:

A female relative accused George Zimmerman, charged in the murder of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, of sexually molesting her from age 6 to 16, according to new documents made public on Monday by prosecutors.

Not a racist, but maybe a pedophile.

And wholly irrelevant to the case at hand. I think the guy should do some jail time, but I hate this kind of nonsense.

Yup. That is what I thought when I read it.

The odd thing is that he is only two years older than the victim, so allegedly sexually molested her while he was aged 8-18. This invokes the concepts underlying juvenile justice rather than anything he's done as an adult.

When I read the headline of another article, it made him sound like a standard pedophile. (I assume you can't be an eight-year-old pedophile- but I don't know anything much about these cases).

Jeez. It just keeps getting better.

link

(Reuters) - George Zimmerman, who is charged in the shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, was accused by his female cousin of sexually molesting her for a decade beginning when she was 6 years old, according to new documents made public on Monday by prosecutors.

The name of the relative was deleted from an audio tape version of her witness statement that was released to the media. Identified only as Witness No. 9, she would be about age 27 now.

Zimmerman's lawyer, Mark O'Mara, confirmed the woman was the former neighborhood watch volunteer's cousin.

farley3k wrote:
Atras wrote:
muttonchop wrote:

So now there's this:

A female relative accused George Zimmerman, charged in the murder of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, of sexually molesting her from age 6 to 16, according to new documents made public on Monday by prosecutors.

Not a racist, but maybe a pedophile.

And wholly irrelevant to the case at hand. I think the guy should do some jail time, but I hate this kind of nonsense.

Yup. That is what I thought when I read it.

Character does matter, to a degree.

When someone sets themselves up as a protector of their neighborhood, character matters more than just "a degree".