"Hispanic" isn't a race, it is an ethnicity. Big difference. So
if you are going to refer to him as a "mixed race", then I'm still
waiting to hear what the other race is.
UtahBlueDevilWe may see what we want to see, but I don't remember Al
Sharpton and Jessie Jackson doing speeches intended to rally the masses after
the OJ Simpson verdict or the Casey Anthony verdict. Sure the TV magazine
shows continued to cover it (that's their job, to create and present
interesting crime stories). But what we are talking about here is the race
riots, the vandalism, the outrage, the protests, the mobs striking out at
innocent prople in their communities (based on their race) that happened after
the Zimmerman verdict.I may only see what I want to see... but I
don't think these riots happened after the other 2 verdicts. That's
what we're trying to figure out. Why they only happened after the
Zimmerman verdict, and not the other 2.What we're trying to
figure out is... Was the race of the offender and the victim the reason why the
protests and riots happened in the one case and not ther others? If so...
it's important to understand this dynamic and the reasons Al Sharption and
Jessie Jackson call for the outrage in one situation, and called for celebration
in the Simpson case.
Maverick,I think he was outside his car because he didn't want Martin
to leave the area before police got there to talk to him. His neighborhood had
a string of crimes and he wanted to find out if the hooded guy roming the
neighborhood was involved.I can't understand the exact reason
for the different responses to the two verdicts. I hope somebody can. Both were equitals, but there were major differences in the two cases.
One went there with the intent to kill (he was dressed, gloved and equipped for
murder, with the Chicago alibi already setup, and fled from police in his bronco
when police tried to question him). The other didn't intend to kill
anybody, he just wanted him to wait to talk to police... and things went south
from there. But he stayed and cooperated with police instead of running.I don't get why the bigger outrage is reserved for the guy who
didn't intend to kill anybody but got in a bad situation... and we give the
guy who went there intending to kill 2 people a pass.
I don't see any purpose in the question, other to infer that Black people,
when wronged, riot and demonstrate.Simpson got away with murder, for sure,
no doubt, via lawyers' tricks.Zimmerman got away with creating a
stupid situation, resulting in a death, because there were no witnesses to prove
what happened.FYI White People -- Black working class teens will beat on
you if you insult them, but not kill you. George had no business getting out of
So what was Zimmerman doing outside of his car? Trying to answer the
question the 911 operator asked him,. Legally walking on the
sidewalk of his neighborhood.Being visible so if there were those
around casing for possible crime victims, they would know that this neighborhood
has neighbors who watch, walk, and own their neighborhood.All legal
things.All you in Martin's camp, what evidence is there that
Zimmerman did anything illegal?Here let me answer for you. He was
being whiter than Martin. But that is not illegal.So the real answer is
NONE! No evidence of illegal behavior from Zimmerman.
The Simpson and Zimmerman cases are completely different from each other. It is
stupid to try to generalize them together to make some common point. The only
thing they have in common is that there was massive publicity that tended to
distort what really happened in each case.
Because O.J. Simpson was innocent and he is looking for the real killer(s).At the golf course...
It's puzzling how many are prepared to jump to judgment on either side of
this case when so few have listened to or read every detail that was presented
to the jury. Just because we like or don't like the outcome, does not
mean that we are suddenly well informed about the evidence. What
is reported in the print media or in broadcast media is always a report of some
observer's reaction. Unfortunately most of these observers also saw only a
very small part of the trial.
"Because one side always chooses to play the victim card."Kind of like all those who are still crying that the only reason Romney lost
was because he is Mormon.... funny how it works that way.Silly when
one side used it... so justified when ones self uses it. How many pieces has
the DN done on the election some 8 months after the fact?I know....
its different when someone else does it.
Uh, because an unarmed child on a harmless errand was shot and killed by an
armed adult, without legal consequences of any kind for the adult?
@Demo Dave 9:12 a.m. July 28, 2013"...could someone
satisfactorily explain why the reaction to one [could] be so different from the
other?" Because one side always chooses to play the victim
card.------------------------What a GREAT comment about
the Zimmerman defenders' use of the victim card. Poor George!
@ Real Maverick. That's a fair question. First of all Zimmerman had been
elected by the community to be it's watch captain. They had organized a
watch program due to numerous burglaries and crimes of that nature. Young black
men in hoodies had been observed perpetrating these crimes. That night Z
observed a young male in a hoodie walking, not on the sidewalk, but along the
houses. He called the non-emergency number of the police. They asked for
information as to where the young man was going and what he looked like. Z
exited his car (a pickup by the way) to follow and observe what Z believed to be
a possible burglar. The dispatcher (not a trained police) asked questions and
in addition asked Z if he was "STILL" following. He said he was but that
he had lost sight of the suspect. TM had more than enough time to get where he
was going. Instead TM circled back, confronted Z and attacked Z. Those actions
got TM killed. I've run into young black men like TM who will fight you
for no reason other than a perception of disrespect.
Why haven't we seen an honest opinion poll on the verdict? Probably
because a great majority agrees with how the jury saw it. But that
wouldn't make as big a splash as interviewing a few disgruntled agitators
that want to use it to further their agenda.
"...could someone satisfactorily explain why the reaction to one [could] be
so different from the other?" Because one side always chooses to
play the victim card.
Obama needs a distraction from all the political scandals surrounding his
administration right now: IRS targeting, NSA snooping, Benghazi, etc. Making
the Zimmerman case about race is a great distraction.
Fred.... your just not remembering then. For weeks the news was filled with
pieces about the OJ Simpson acquittal. You can still google or yahoo search
many of them. And what you are also leaving out is the out rage that follow
the Casey Anthony verdict as well. There again there was outrage at how this
young woman got away with the death of here daughter, in these fame Florida
courts.We see things we want to see... and ignore things that
don't match the story we want to believe.... it is just human nature.
What is equally amazing is the lack of outrage when events like those around
Brandon McClelland of Texas. It was a crime that didn't get endless
headlines in the DN. Why no outrage?We make of things what we want
So what was Zimmerman doing outside of his car? Anyone from the
zimmers camp dare answer this question?