Patterico's Pontifications

7/22/2013

Proof that Zimmerman’s Calls to 911 About Black Males Were Legitimate And Not Racial

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:27 am



This post refutes Scott Eric Kaufman’s recent post suggesting George Zimmerman was a racial profiler.

Regular readers will recall Kaufman’s post, which claimed that a series of calls between August 2011 and February 2012 proved Zimmerman had begun fixating on black males:

[S]tarting in August of 2011, Zimmerman’s calls took on a decidedly different note. He reported:

3 August 2011: “[a] black male last seen wearing a white tank top and black shorts,” who he “believes … is involved in recent [burglaries]“
6 August 2011: “two black males … in their teens”
23 September 2011: yet another “open garage door,” but specifies reason for calling is “neighborhood watch [meeting] last night”
1 October 2011: “two black males … 20 – 30 [years old] in Chevy [possibly] Impala at the gate of the community,” about whom Zimmerman’s concerned because he “does not recognize [the subjects] or [vehicle] and is concerned due to recent burglaries”
29 January 2012: children “running and playing in the street”
2 February 2012: “[black male last seen wearing] black leather jacket, black hat, printed PJ pants [who] keeps going to [the same] location”

And then on 26 February 2012 he calls about Trayvon Martin. There’s a pattern here obvious to anyone without an investment in not seeing it.

I have previously criticized this analysis as sophomoric, which it is, because it makes absolutely no attempt to determine whether the people Zimmerman called about actually were acting suspicious. As I said:

SEK implicitly declares irrelevant petty details such as these:

  • Were the black people he called the police on actually acting suspicious?
  • Were there non-black people he observed who were acting suspiciously but did not become the focus of Zimmerman’s attention?

All he needs to know is: most of the people Zimmerman called about were black. Ergo he profiled them on the basis of race, end of analysis.

Lurking reader (and former commenter) Stu707 sends along a link to an interesting piece linked by Instapundit that got me started down the path of examining the first (bolded) bullet point above: was Zimmerman justified in calling 911 about these black males? The search took me to the site of the Orlando Sentinel as well as to Talk Left, and was very revealing.

In short, Zimmerman had plenty of reason to find these people suspicious.

Let’s break it down, starting with the first two calls that SEK finds to be evidence of race-based profiling:

3 August 2011: “[a] black male last seen wearing a white tank top and black shorts,” who he “believes … is involved in recent [burglaries]“
6 August 2011: “two black males … in their teens”

TalkLeft addressed these two calls in this excellent post:

Two of the five calls the state played for the jury pertained to the home invasion at Bertalan’s residence.

It was Olivia Bertalan, not Zimmerman, who called police to report a home invasion at her home while she and her infant son were home. She saw the perpetrators, hid in a bedroom and called 911 at 11:00 a.m. Bertalan described the perpetrators in her 911 call to police as two young African American males. Shelley Zimmerman also saw the suspects and provided a description to police.

Later that day, at 5:00 p.m., Zimmerman went to her home and brought her a new deadbolt because hers wasn’t working. At 6:45 pm Zimmerman called the non-emergency number to report he spotted someone who fit the description Bertalan had given police of one of the suspects. The police did not catch him that night.

On August 6, Zimmerman called non-emergency again to tell police that the male fitting Bertalan’s description was back in the neighborhood, and that he and Shelley had just seen him again. He told police they might want to send someone over to Calabria Cove apartments because he thought that’s where the male would run to. Again the police didn’t catch him. The case was placed on inactive status.

TalkLeft goes on to present evidence tending to show that two black males actually did commit the burglary:

In September, police got a latent print report from the lab which showed that two prints found on the wall between Retreat at Twin Lakes and Calabria Cove apartments matched someone named Emmanuel Burgess. Bertalan identified Burgess from a photo lineup and charges were filed.

Emmanuel Burgess, who lived with his parents in the neighborhood, was on juvenile parole and and in and out of detention facilities. He lived with his parents at Retreat at Twin Lakes, and was finally arrested in February, 2012, after another burglary at the complex on February 6. His juvenile probation was terminated, he was transferred to adult court, where Judge Nelson presided over his multiple cases, consolidating them. He pleaded guilty to both the burglary at Bertalan’s home in August, 2011 and the Febrary 6th burglary . Zimmerman had nothing to do with reporting the February 6 burglary. Burgess was sentenced by Judge Nelson to five years in prison. The dockets are here and here.

. . . .

Of the five calls the state introduced as supposed support for its theory that they showed Zimmerman’s state of mind as a profiler and wannabe cop, two of the calls pertained to the Beltaran home invasion, in which he didn’t profile anyone. He reported seeing someone who matched the description the homeowner (and his wife) had initially given police. The person he reported not only turned out to be the perpetrator, but the perpetrator was only able to be charged after his latent prints were found on the wall he had jumped over from Retreat at Twin Lakes to the neighboring complex. Burgess didn’t just commit one burglary, but several, and he was found in possession of some of the stolen property when he was arrested. He had a long record as a juvenile and he lived in the neighborhood.

You can actually listen to the August 3, 2011 call if you like. It is at this Orlando Sentinel link. Zimmerman tells 911:

Our neighborhood got burglarized or robbed today. And my wife saw one of the kids that did it, and we see someone that matches his description in the neighborhood now, again.

He adds: “My wife talked to Detective Walker and gave him a description of the guy we see now.” Zimmerman describes the suspect as being in a white tank top and black shorts. In the background you can hear his wife say: “He just went between the houses . . . he’s looking at cars.”

The second call, on August 6, was about the same person, as TalkLeft explains above.

Citing these calls as evidence of racial profiling by Zimmerman is ridiculous. The burglars were black, his wife saw them, and believed she had seen the same person return that day. What was he supposed to do — not call the police?

Incredible.

SEK’s next piece of evidence of Zimmerman’s horrible racism:

23 September 2011: yet another “open garage door,” but specifies reason for calling is “neighborhood watch [meeting] last night”

TalkLeft says:

In the third of the five calls, Zimmerman didn’t report anyone. He called to report an open garage door after 10:00 pm.

That seems to take care of that. Nor do I see any evidence of Zimmerman providing a suspect’s race in the fifth call cited by SEK:

29 January 2012: children “running and playing in the street”

Nothing there about them being black. So that leaves two more calls that SEK complains of:

1 October 2011: “two black males … 20 – 30 [years old] in Chevy [possibly] Impala at the gate of the community,” about whom Zimmerman’s concerned because he “does not recognize [the subjects] or [vehicle] and is concerned due to recent burglaries”
. . . .
2 February 2012: “[black male last seen wearing] black leather jacket, black hat, printed PJ pants [who] keeps going to [the same] location”

TalkLeft addresses these as follows:

That leaves a total of 2 calls prior to February 26 in which he reported African American males as suspicious.

In one, on Feb. 2, the male appeared to him to be casing Frank Taafe’s house, located at the shortcut from the main road. Zimmerman said the guy kept walking up to Taafe’s house and away from it, and he knew the guy didn’t live there. By the time police arrived, the male had left. Taaffe was out of town.

You can listen to this February 2, 2012 call cited by SEK by clicking here. Zimmerman describes a gentleman walking in the neighborhood and says he has seen him before. He says the guy has a black leather jacket and a bomber hat. 53 seconds in, we hear this:

He keeps going to this guy’s house. [An evident reference to Taafe.] I know him, I know the resident, he’s Caucasian. And he’s [meaning the suspicious person] going up to the house and then going along the side of it, and then coming to the street, and then going back to the side of it. I don’t know what he’s doing. I don’t want to approach him, personally.

So it matters in this instance that the suspicious person is black — because he is continually going to the side of a house that can’t be his, because Zimmerman knows the owner, and the owner is Caucasian. Could such actions be innocent? Possibly. Are they worth checking out? You bet. Is it relevant that the guy is black? Absolutely.

In between this February 2 call and the February 26 Trayvon Martin call, there was a burglary in which evidence showed the involvement of more than one black male, resulting in an arrest and recovery of stolen property. From TalkLeft:

On February 6, Tatiana Deamicis reported that her residence in the complex had been burglarized. Two witnesses (Arnold Arms and Iain Beard) told police that they saw a black male, mid-20s, 5’8”, approximately 180 lbs., standing next to Deamicis’s residence (but not entering or leaving it). Beard believed that the individual had stolen his bike (previously reported to police). On February 7, Arms and Beard called police to report three black males and one white male on bicycles “in a cut through area of the complex (a grass area where [the complex] backs up to Colonial Village Apartments),” one of whom (who would turn out to be Burgess) they believed to be the person they saw with a possible connection to the February 6 burglary. Police responded and obtained permission to search the backpack of one of Burgess’s companions (Ransburg), and discovered two laptop computers. A third companion claimed that he had purchased the one of the laptops the previous night. Officers determined, however, that the serial number matched the computer stolen from Deamicis’s residence the prior day. While the officers were attempting to handcuff the four suspects, one fled, but was apprehended shortly thereafter in the Colonial Village Apartments. Burgess’s juvenile probation was terminated and he was arrested. He was ultimately sentenced by Judge Nelson (who also presided over Zimmerman’s trial) to 5 years in prison. It is unclear whether the other suspects remained in custody or were released after February 7, and it is unclear whether they were tried or convicted for anything.)

That leaves the October 1, 2011 call, which TalkLeft describes this way:

In the other of the two calls, during October, 2011, Zimmerman called to report seeing two older (late ’20’s to ’30s) African American males hanging out at the entrance to the gated community at 1:00 in the morning. He reported them for loitering.

That’s pretty much SEK’s entire evidence of racial profiling, right there in that single call. The article linked by Instapundit has more information about that call:

On October 1, GZ reported that two black males, approximately 20-30 years old, appeared to be loitering in their car at the gate of the community at 1 a.m.; he reported that he didn’t recognize them or their vehicle and was concerned due to the recent burglaries in the neighborhood (#39). Later in October, Belatran successfully identifies one of the suspected burglars, Emmanuel Burgess, from a photo lineup. Burgess, who was out on conditional juvenile parole and living with his parents in GZ’s and Belatran’s complex, had apparently become a suspect when police matched two of the latent palm prints to him in September.

He was concerned due to the recent burglaries in the neighborhood — which he knew, based on eyewitness testimony that was corroborated by fingerprint evidence, involved two young black males.

Even if you want to say he was profiling based on race, in this, the one and only call cited by SEK in which there was not a specific non-race-based reason to find the suspects to be suspicious, he is still relating his suspicion back to recent burglaries with unquestionably black suspects.

You have now read evidence that each and every one of the calls cited by SEK which involved black males suspected before the Martin call, with the possible and arguable exception of the last one, was one in which the suspects actually were acting suspiciously, regardless of their race. And, to the extent their race mattered, you have read evidence showing that the race of the subjects was a legitimate concern for Zimmerman.

Yet SEK tells you, from his ivory tower: “There’s a pattern here obvious to anyone without an investment in not seeing it. What began as annoying 911 operators with pointless complaints escalated to notifying the authorities any time he saw a black male he didn’t know.”

I’d like to think SEK will read this post and realize the error of his ways. Instead, I think he will read this post and ignore it, or insinuate that I am somehow a racist. At a minimum, he will say it proves, rather than destroys, his point. He will argue that this shows Zimmerman actually was concerned with black males on the basis of their race. He will gloss over the fact that two of the calls relate to a particular suspect, which undercuts his numbers. He will gloss over suspicious behavior such as repeatedly going to the side of a house that doesn’t belong to you.

Gloss over evidence, ignore evidence, minimize evidence, and loudly re-proclaim his now discredited point. That is what we can expect, and I have no doubt about it.

TIME FOR A NATIONAL CONVERSATION ON RACE!!!! WHO’S WITH ME???!!!

252 Responses to “Proof that Zimmerman’s Calls to 911 About Black Males Were Legitimate And Not Racial”

  1. Entirely irrelevant post because…Cleveland guy…or perhaps English baby!!

    Our republic has a true societal illness in that we choose to ignore the obvious since to acknowledge such requires difficult actions.

    Ed from SFV (962ab6)

  2. There will come a day when we judge men by teh content of their backpacks and not by teh color of their skin.

    Colonel Haiku (207b84)

  3. Also interesting the prosecution did not want the jury to hear the 5th phone call (about the kids playing in the street) and fought to keep it out of evidence though defense was allowed to introduce along with the others. Remember, Martin family attorney admitted, this isn’t about the law it’s about social engineering.

    Steven W. (9109a4)

  4. There is no such thing as “racism.” It’s either true or it’s not.

    That having been said, did Zimmerman make those black people commit 99% of the crimes in that neighborhood?

    CrustyB (69f730)

  5. Why do you continue to believe SEK is a good guy? He’s not. He’ll lie about you, lie about us, all in the quest for power.

    Rob Crawford (e6f27f)

  6. That pretty much puts paid to that.

    SPQR (768505)

  7. I don’t want to approach him, personally.

    As highlighted by you, Pat; clearly not consistent with the portrayal of Z as a wannabe who is looking for opportunities to shoot black males.

    It is nice to see more facts, but it would be nice for the facts to penetrate the public discourse.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  8. The media will get right on that, MD!

    Colonel Haiku (146aeb)

  9. Later that day, at 5:00 p.m., Zimmerman went to her home and brought her a new deadbolt because hers wasn’t working.

    I don’t care whether or not Zimmerman was a wanna-be cop, but cops should wanna be Zimmerman. “Hi, nice old lady who just had her home robbed; let’s make sure that doesn’t happen to you again.”

    bridget (37b281)

  10. I don’t see why you guys are avoiding the obvious signs of racism here.

    Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch captain. If he weren’t a racist, like all good public safety administrators he’d have told the neighborhood watch participants to report white and Asian people who weren’t acting suspiciously to the police.

    Heck, they should have fabricated descriptions of people who didn’t exist just to get the right numbers. That’s one way you can get the kind of crime reporting statistics that prove you’re not a racist.

    Big Sis at TSA knew that; that’s why TSA targets nonagenarian Caucasian women in wheelchairs. Nanny Bloomberg knows that:

    Mayor Bloomberg on stop-and-frisk: It can be argued ‘We disproportionately stop whites too much. And minorities too little’

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mayor-bloomberg-stop-and-frisk-disproportionately-stop-whites-minorities-article-1.1385410#ixzz2ZmtVhBb7

    The other way is to simply stop reporting crimes committed by blacks, like the noble Chief Hurley of the M-DSPD. Which allowed St. Skittles to skate on his vandalism, criminal mischief and theft charges.

    And instead of facing the Miami-Dade juvenile justice system set the stage for his 10 day vacation to Orlando where he got shot by GZ instead. But the important thing is Chief Hurley, like Nanny Bloomberg and Big Sis knew how to generate the kind of numbers the raaaaacism police need to see or else they’ll say:

    There’s a pattern here obvious to anyone without an investment in not seeing it.

    Everybody knows this. Which means GZ must have known this. But he didn’t do it. Ergo, he’s a racist. GZ could have played with the numbers. But he didn’t.

    It’s almost like he wanted to rub his raw, unreconstructed racism in SEK’s face!

    Steve57 (2dd692)

  11. “Yet SEK tells you, from his ivory tower: “There’s a pattern here obvious to anyone without an investment in not seeing it. What began as annoying 911 operators with pointless complaints escalated to notifying the authorities any time he saw a black male he didn’t know.””

    SEK’s investment in ‘having’ to see it, has clouded his vision. Typical when a presupposition is firmly in place and actions must neatly complement and confirm it.

    Dana (24f19f)

  12. The burglars were black, his wife saw them, and believed she had seen the same person return that day. What was he supposed to do — not call the police?

    So many burglars were not supposed to be black.

    Sammy Finkelman (16fe92)

  13. A lot of people have trouble with that idea.

    Sammy Finkelman (16fe92)

  14. 5. I hate to say so, but daley was right on an earlier thread. SEK is reasonably intelligent but irremediably challenged by elementary logic.

    Prolly an English lecturer or something equivalent.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  15. I’m blessed to live in a place where we don’t care what color someone is. SEK must see a lot of racism to be this convinced it exists elsewhere.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  16. If one runs in liberal circles, one sees racism everywhere. It’s unavoidable.

    Colonel Haiku (c27e3f)

  17. SEK’s academic speciality is rhetoric, i.e. persuasive speech. He’s a sophist by training. In order to advance his political ends, he’s attempting by all means available to make the weaker argument stronger.

    Sahkruhteez (10053e)

  18. On the garage doors: a neighbor gave an interview and explained his house had been broken into. While the neighbor was away, Zimmerman noticed the garage door was open. That is when he called, since he knew that house had been a target and the neighbor’s were out of town. It would be suspicious if a neighbor goes out of town and the garage door is suddenly found open – the way SEK presents it, however, it misleading since he juxtaposes potholes next to open garage doors next to suspicious activity calls (and this comparison makes you wonder how good GZ’s judgement is if he calls 911 for both potholes and suspicious activity, though, as explained prior, he may be rerouted through Sanford’s emergency line system). I’m trying to find the video, but haven’t found it yet.

    My humble request: can we please have a “How the Media Profiled Zimmerman” post? It would be epic to see how they jumped from him being white to white hispanic.

    ratbeach (f5aad4)

  19. 17. SEK’s academic speciality is rhetoric, i.e. persuasive speech. He’s a sophist by training. In order to advance his political ends, he’s attempting by all means available to make the weaker argument stronger.

    Comment by Sahkruhteez (10053e) — 7/22/2013 @ 9:29 am

    If his specialty is persuasive speech, then one would expect his argument to be persuasive.

    As it is all he’s doing is providing people who already agree with him a pretext to disregard anything said by anyone he can’t persuade.

    He’s not making the weak argument stronger. He’s attempting to pretend his weak, sophomoric position is the only honest one.

    There’s a pattern here obvious to anyone without an investment in not seeing it.

    See? No one else has an argument, just emotional investments.

    Steve57 (2dd692)

  20. I’ve never seen SEK make arguments in good faith. I wouldn’t mind him being right or wrong but I can’t stand someone who won’t kick the tires of their own argument.

    There are critical elisions most of the time, not just puffed rhetoric. I can’t know if care if it’s just his ideological blinkers in the way, or real attempts to hide or exaggerate, but his arguments are always the weaker, not stronger for it and it leads to contempt and suspicion of his mad skilz in general.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  21. Of course, as per usual people like SEK are projecting.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324448104578618681599902640.html

    The Decline of the Civil-Rights Establishment

    Black leaders weren’t so much outraged at injustice as they were by the disregard of their own authority.

    SEK’s argument is weak precisely because one has to be emotionally invested in seeing racism everywhere to see the GZ/TM case as anything but a run-of-the-mill self-defense case.

    Also, in the case of the race mongers, financially invested.

    …On television in recent weeks you could see black leaders from every background congealing into a chorus of umbrage and complaint. But they weren’t so much outraged at a horrible injustice as they were affronted by the disregard of their own authority. The jury effectively said to them, “You won’t call the tune here. We will work within the law.”

    Today’s black leadership pretty much lives off the fumes of moral authority that linger from its glory days in the 1950s and ’60s. The Zimmerman verdict lets us see this and feel a little embarrassed for them. Consider the pathos of a leadership that once transformed the nation now lusting for the conviction of the contrite and mortified George Zimmerman, as if a stint in prison for him would somehow assure more peace and security for black teenagers everywhere. This, despite the fact that nearly one black teenager a day is shot dead on the South Side of Chicago—to name only one city—by another black teenager.

    This would not be the first time that a movement begun in profound moral clarity, and that achieved greatness, waned away into a parody of itself—not because it was wrong but because it was successful.

    …The Zimmerman/Martin tragedy has been explosive because it triggered a fight over authority. Who gets to say what things mean—the supporters of George Zimmerman, who say he acted in self-defense, or the civil-rights establishment that says he profiled and murdered a black child? Here we are. And where is the authority to resolve this? The six-person Florida jury, looking carefully at the evidence, decided that Mr. Zimmerman pulled the trigger in self-defense and not in a fury of racial hatred.

    And here, precisely at the point of this verdict, is where all of America begins to see this hollowed-out civil-rights establishment slip into pathos. Almost everyone saw this verdict coming. It is impossible to see how this jury could have applied the actual law to this body of evidence and come up with a different conclusion. The civil-rights establishment’s mistake was to get ahead of itself, to be seduced by its own poetic truth even when there was no evidence to support it. And even now its leaders call for a Justice Department investigation, and they long for civil lawsuits to be filed—hoping against hope that some leaf of actual racial victimization will be turned over for all to see. This is how a once-great social movement looks when it becomes infested with obsolescence.

    In essence, the argument SEK is trying and failing to make is one of authority. He insists there’s a deeper meaning to those statistics, and if we don’t see it we’re just emotionally invested in not seeing it.

    Which is a perverse way of looking at the world. To paraphrase Freud, an umbrella is just an umbrella. If you see a phallic symbol, well, you’re the one who needs therapy.

    Insist all you want that there’s some deeper meaning to it all that only you can see, but there’s nothing wrong with the people who look at an umbrella and just see an umbrella.

    Steve57 (2dd692)

  22. I second ratbeach’s request #18 @9:31am. The media did profile GZ, they took the strategy created by Ryan Julison at the behest of Martin family legal team Crump/Jackson/Parks and ran with it.

    From the outset the plan was carefully crafted using edited audio tape and doctored video to paint George Zimmerman as a racist wannabe cop who shot down an angelic young African American boy in cold blood only because he was a black kid walking at night in a white neighborhood.

    It was a fabrication, as dirty and deceitful as required to inflame racial passions, manufacture false evidence, obscure the true facts, and play into existing media prejudices. It was done for the worst of motives and Julison, Crump, Jackson, and Parks are only the visible tip of the cabal of racist manipulators who deserve to be exposed and held accountable for malicious persecution, both within the Florida legal system and in the national media. Once I likened it to the Dreyfus Affair and the parallels still ring true.

    ropelight (22a223)

  23. R.I.P. Dennis Farina

    Icy (2c258e)

  24. it appears that a leopard can’t change his spots:

    http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/07/hero-george-zimmerman-comes-out-of-hiding-to-help-accident-victim/

    i’d rather have GZ as my neighbor than the Martin family.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  25. The actual facts never really mattered to SEKs. It was, and is, always about Teh Narrative with him.

    JD (b63a52)

  26. 25, The actual facts never really mattered to SEKs. It was, and is, always about Teh Narrative with him.

    Comment by JD (b63a52) — 7/22/2013 @ 10:55 am

    Liberalism in a nutshell.

    When the facts conflict with the tenets of liberalism, the facts must be altered to fit the tenets of liberalism.

    For instance, the only reason blacks are associated with crime way out of proportion to their percentage of the population is due to racism.

    Thus the statistics must be juggled to demonstrate that the people juggling the statistics are sensitive to the charge, and aren’t racists.

    GZ didn’t juggle his reporting statistics to conform to SEK’s preconceived conclusions.

    Ergo, he’s a racist.

    Steve57 (2dd692)

  27. Me, I’m a coward.
    But, if the “conversation” gets too “heated”, I’ll just let “the big dog bark”.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  28. This is turning out to be a much ado about nothing (from Reuters ):

    In New York, scene of one of the largest rallies, roughly 2,000 protesters, some carrying “Boycott Florida” signs or wearing T-shirts with Martin’s picture, were led by an emotional Sybrina Fulton, the slain teenager’s mother.

    The article also speaks of “hundreds” of protesters on dozens of cities.

    Million-man-march anyone?

    Pons Asinorum (8ce71a)

  29. Make that… in dozens of cities

    Pons Asinorum (8ce71a)

  30. TIME FOR A NATIONAL CONVERSATION ON RACE!!!!

    It was never about having a national conversation about race; it was always about having a national conversation in which you agree that you are a racist.

    SEK is not interested in anything so mundane as evidence; he’s interested in opportunities to show you that you’re a racist. If these opportunities pass, there will always be others.

    It’s about persistence, in other words. Not veracity.

    Slartibartfast (4090b3)

  31. Did GZ only help save these people because they were White, and why doesn’t ABC even know what race they were, or say (is it like the missing party affiliation when a D has been uncovered doing something bad – are they black, and would that destroy the previously constructed narrative?)?
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-emerged-hiding-truck-crash-rescue/story?id=19735432#.Ue1m38XSi9U.twitter

    H/T Insty.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  32. Guess Mr. Zimmerman has not learned his lesson ( from Yahoo news):

    George Zimmerman, who has been in hiding since he was acquitted of murder in the death of Trayvon Martin, emerged to help rescue someone who was trapped in an overturned truck, police said today [incident happened last week].

    Looks like the liberal orthodoxy failed to teach him not to get involved.

    Pons Asinorum (8ce71a)

  33. Sorry askeptic, cross-posts.

    Pons Asinorum (8ce71a)

  34. Here’s the type of guy George Zimmerman is.

    In case the link doesn’t work this is the story
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-emerged-hiding-truck-crash-rescue/storynew?id=19735432

    Jim (823b10)

  35. So, he helped folks get out of the car? I thought he’d learned his lesson by now.

    Ed from SFV (962ab6)

  36. For reasons explained elsewhere, I’ll be brief and not respond to comments, but:

    SEK’s next piece of evidence of Zimmerman’s horrible racism

    I never claimed Zimmerman was a racist. In fact, I said that he wasn’t:

    The argument that he’s not racist and wasn’t profiling is based on the fact that he “mentored black children” and “had black friends” and is entirely beside the point, because it presumes that he’s an overt and deliberate racist. Those who make it claim victory when they demonstrate that he never wore a white hood or bedecked his body in Nazi ink.

    I’ll grant that that Zimmerman didn’t pine for the days of short ropes and sturdy limbs.

    I’ll grant that he didn’t dream of goose-stepping down the Champs-Élysées in his dress browns.

    One can profile without being a racist. Hell, half the comments on this post and the previous one celebrate the fact that given crime statistics, one should profile black people and that saying as much doesn’t make one a racist.

    SEK (74bb56)

  37. SEK, you got your ass handed to you and that’s all you can say?

    No surprise really.

    SPQR (768505)

  38. SEK, in the Spring/Summer of 1940, the German Wehrmacht wore blue (don’t you remember Casablanca?), and the BrownShirts (SA) had been disbanded for over five-years (Night of the Long Knives).

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  39. Yes, one should profile suspicious persons in one’s neighborhood. Actions matter, time, place, weather, light, the property invovled and recent and relevant cirminal activity. It might have a disparate impact (the nost perfidious words ever applied to equality before the law) because crime in a given neighborhood is disproportionately related to persons in an ethnic subtype.

    But no, you called Z’s profiling racist, you said he made these calls because the subjects were black black and black again.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  40. askeptic, The Germans wore gray, Elsa wore blue.

    Sheesh.

    SPQR (768505)

  41. Sorry — I clearly remember everyone in Casablanca wearing varying shades of gray.

    Rob Crawford (e6f27f)

  42. I think the important lesson from this is that SEK is not trustworthy.

    Rob Crawford (e6f27f)

  43. And water is mildly damp.

    narciso (3fec35)

  44. Trayvon lashed out using violence is my understanding whereas George Zimmerman was exploring the peaceful conflict resolution

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  45. Wasn’t Jessie Jackson profiling when he said that he was relieved to see white guys behind him rather than blacks?

    ropelight (22a223)

  46. It’s good that SEK wanted to have a discussion about this. It’s really annoying that every time he wants to have a discussion, he begins from the position that to disagree with him is to be dishonest or ignore reality, and then when reasonable arguments are brought forward challenging or even totally overcoming his point of view, he starts ignoring the discussion.

    I hope SEK can break that habit and have a productive discussion.

    Dustin (ce0303)

  47. Dustin, I’m not ignoring this discussion — See, I’m still here! — I’m just not willing to have it here for reasons I’ve outlined to Patrick. I will, however, respond to this post in time.

    SEK (74bb56)

  48. Always trust SEK being taken to the woodshed by Patterico.

    Icy (2c258e)

  49. If I might let my WWII nerd side run wild…..the German army of WWII wore uniforms of a color called feldgrau, or field gray. Feldgrau is really a shade of green. A grayish green, but green nonetheless. Kind of like how the American “olive drab” was really more of a greenish brown than an olive green.

    radar (257ad5)

  50. RIP Dennis Farina

    We’re losing our great character actors.

    elissa (7047a4)

  51. The backhanded sneer, that SEK can do here. But acknowledge that he got schooled? Not here.

    SPQR (768505)

  52. Better to do it on Facebook, or at Crooks and Liars, where he will inevitably maintain the racial profiling narrative.

    JD (1e7da9)

  53. I love it when a false perspective is stomped into the ground. I learned a lot here about the citizen involvement of Zimmerman. He makes me feel like a piker. We would be a much better country if neighbors helped repair broken locks and watched each other’s houses. More shame on the left who tried to twist a man’s good efforts in his community to make him guilty in their electronic persecution of him. Apparently many lefties are not good enough to tie Zimmerman’s shoes.

    red (7b5f67)

  54. 36. …One can profile without being a racist. Hell, half the comments on this post and the previous one celebrate the fact that given crime statistics, one should profile black people and that saying as much doesn’t make one a racist.

    Comment by SEK (74bb56) — 7/22/2013 @ 1:01 pm

    More distortions. Distortions on top of distortions.

    I suppose when your starting premise is that anyone who is well intentioned already agrees you, SEK, then that’s the fallback position.

    “Not only did GZ establish a racist pattern, but the people who have a vested interest in pretending not to see it are celebrating the idea of profiling black people.”

    Some conversation.

    Steve57 (2dd692)

  55. You notice since the mid 80s, there has been a pattern of mendacity, first Sharpton and the Tawana Brawley matter, then Moore and ‘Roger and Me’ he had met with Roger Smith, Cyndi Sheehan, and the ‘nonexistent’ meeting she had with W.

    narciso (3fec35)

  56. Comment by SPQR (768505) — 7/22/2013 @ 1:11 pm

    At this point, SPQR, what difference does it make?

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  57. TIME FOR A NATIONAL CONVERSATION ON RACE!!!! WHO’S WITH ME???!!!

    Quite sincerely, we need a conversation on how the lopsided amount of liberalism throughout the black community has either helped or hindered it.

    When 95-plus percent of a populace shares the same political biases and sentiments, that’s just a wee bit less than almost any other feature of the group in question, including skin color. Actually, there may be more diversity in skin color in black America than in voting patterns, since skin tone varies from dark brown (eg, Michael Jordan), to an in-between brown (eg, Obama), to a very light beige (eg, Beyonce).

    Truth be told, I’m being only partly glib when making such an observation, since the monolithic liberalism in the black community is not easily exaggerated.

    Mark (83be92)

  58. it’s not so much monolithic liberalism as it is voting for free stuff.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  59. Ben Stein:

    He attacked Zimmerman, who possibly would have been killed if he had not defended himself.
    This is the story the jury heard. This is the story that made the jury unanimously acquit Zimmerman. The media have been telling a fairy tale designed to whip up race hatred.
    It horrifies me that the media has tried to turn this sad case into an occasion to make black people hate white people. It horrifies me that Mr. Obama has joined in.
    ….
    the black community in this nation is in crisis. It has a disastrous situation in terms of education, lack of work habits, complete collapse of the family, wild overuse of drugs, violence, and generally behavior that is destructive to itself and far too many other people. (Obviously, this applies only to some black people. I work every day and you work every day with black people who are in fine shape….)

    The least of the problems that black people face in the USA right now is attacks by heavy set volunteer watchmen in gated communities. That’s not even on the radar screen as a serious problem. For Mr. Obama and other “black leaders” and media people to pretend that it is is simply nonsense.
    There is real anarchy in many parts of the black community in the USA. For Mr. Obama and others to act as if the real problem is white people locking their car doors at stop lights when black people approach them is just plain poppycock. The black community is not in danger from white people: it is in danger from itself.

    http://spectator.org/archives/2013/07/22/feeling-the-heat

    elissa (7047a4)

  60. “It horrifies me that the media has tried to turn this sad case into an occasion to make black people hate white people. It horrifies me that Mr. Obama has joined in.”

    If you parse his words carefully, you will see that Barack Obama did not even endorse the idea that George Zimmerman attacked Trayvon Martin.

    He spoke about the “incredible grace and dignity” of Trayvon Martins mother and father, but he never endorsed their version of events. You won’t ever catch him doing that.

    Of course he’s said things that imply that. I heard one man ask another on Shabbos afternoon words to the effect: “what do you think about what Obama said that he could have been killed too?”

    Obama didn’t say that. But the message got through.

    His interlocutor replied “He’s stupid. He was elected President and..(something) ”

    But Obama isn’t stupid or ignorant enough to believe that.

    There’s a lot of people that Obama cannot say no too, or at least he can’t say or imply they are a disgrace. He can’t say there’s a lot of disinformation that’s been propounded. His most loyal voters are always right.

    Sammy Finkelman (16fe92)

  61. the race of the subjects was a … concern for Zimmerman.

    So, you ADMIT he’s a racist?

    Ich Bin Ubn Gruber, Official Psychic Channeller for Scott Eric Kaufman (a2f645)

  62. ^^^^^^

    Joke. Read the Author.

    Ich Bin Ubn Gruber, Official Psychic Channeller for Scott Eric Kaufman (a2f645)

  63. SEK’s comments are exactly what I predicted in the post. I predicted exactly what he would ignore and what he would claim:

    I’d like to think SEK will read this post and realize the error of his ways. Instead, I think he will read this post and ignore it, or insinuate that I am somehow a racist. At a minimum, he will say it proves, rather than destroys, his point. He will argue that this shows Zimmerman actually was concerned with black males on the basis of their race. He will gloss over the fact that two of the calls relate to a particular suspect, which undercuts his numbers. He will gloss over suspicious behavior such as repeatedly going to the side of a house that doesn’t belong to you.

    So what does he do? Stroll in here, claim he never called Zimmerman a racist (as though that was the point of the post), and proceeds to ignore all the salient points of the post.

    P.S. Meanwhile, note that in his post where he doesn’t call Zimmerman a racist, he analogizes him to a guy who runs up to a group of black people and screams the n-word at them. Not that this has anything to do with the point of my post, or the utterly predictable and trollish way in which he chose to sidestep my points.

    SPQR says it best above:

    SEK, you got your ass handed to you and that’s all you can say?

    No surprise really.

    Nope, it isn’t. That’s why I predicted it in the post.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  64. The very people who are curious why I won’t respond here are the reason I won’t respond here. Funny how that works. I should also note this inaccuracy in the original post:

    SEK tells you, from his ivory tower

    I tell you nothing from an ivory tower, as I’ve never inhabited one. I’ve been a lecturer, and those of you who know what you’re talking about know what that means. (Including being regularly attacked — and illegally stalked — by tenured people who actually have all the protections implied by the phrase “ivory tower.”) So spare me the “ivory tower” nonsense.

    I’ll look over this material, evaluate it, and respond. But to Patrick, DRJ, Dustin, and other respectable people, not to you lot. (If you have to ask yourself “Does he mean me?” then yes, I probably do.)

    SEK (74bb56)

  65. SEK’s comments are exactly what I predicted in the post.

    Dude, the extent of my comments so far have been, 1) I didn’t claim he was a racist, 2) I don’t have time to respond at the moment, but will, and 3) I don’t inhabit the ivory tower. If you should’ve gathered anything from the past few days, it’s that someone as busy as you should understand the value of chilling when it comes to responding immediately to something someone else has posted. I corrected a few errors and said I’d address the argument later. Given that I’ve yet to break my word in this respect, I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.

    SEK (74bb56)

  66. That phrase, I do not think it means what you think it means.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  67. I would think if you were going to make only one point here, which is what you implied, it would be one that takes the argument head on.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  68. 1) Check your email.

    2) That takes time, which is all I’ve asked for. So, seriously, chill.

    SEK (74bb56)

  69. Just remember, folks, despite the “I’m not in the Ivory Tower” prattle, this man has marinated in academia his entire career—being a happy follower (despite his weird claim of independent thought) the entire while.

    Oh well.

    You know what would be a good sign of independence? For this fellow to take a supposedly “right of center” POV, just to demonstrate that the Left is in fact tolerant. For example, why not chide people who have utterly no science background pontificating on AGW—call them out for being political hacks? That would take genuine courage (and would be accurate). But dangerous.

    As for having been “stalked” by tenured individuals, well…I think that Patterico and JD know how I would respond to that silliness.

    SEK, you don’t forge new ground as an independent thinker, dude, despite your reciting “Invictus” under your breath. You are a happy follower, being used and abused by the system you cherish. Sorry about that, truly.

    The good news is that he will recognize this reference…with gin-scented tears trickling down his face.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  70. SEK’s unclear
    when you find yourself in hole
    you must stop digging

    Colonel Haiku (f09d7b)

  71. See how brave he is, narciso? I like the snottiness of the verbiage. He certainly does accuse the readers of National Review of being racist, and will hide behind his Huntington Vorhees the 3rd style writing (“Why, I never meant that; because you interpreted my words in that fashion must mean you are a racist!”).

    Please. It’s typical committee meeting passive aggressive rhetoric.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  72. Scott Eric Kaufman
    not from ivory tower
    so chill! he implores

    Colonel Haiku (f09d7b)

  73. You know what would be a good sign of independence? For this fellow to take a supposedly “right of center” POV, just to demonstrate that the Left is in fact tolerant.

    Yes, if I opportunistically defended a position I don’t actually hold, I’m sure that’d convince you that the Left is tolerant. What if I posted at proteinwisdom years ago — before Jeff jumped off the deep end — because his anti-identitarian politics were closer to my own beliefs than anything I found on the left. What I hosted an entire book event on a work based on those beliefs called The Trouble With Diversity? Would that convince you that I’m capable of independent thought? No, it wouldn’t, so stop erecting goalposts you’re going to move the instant I challenge them.

    As for having been “stalked” by tenured individuals, well…I think that Patterico and JD know how I would respond to that silliness.

    As for knowing what you’re talking about, well … Patrick knows that I am, and I don’t give a fuck about JD.

    This, by the way, is what I mean when I say I can’t respond to anything here without also feeling compelled to respond to endless pointless bullshit. It’d be nice, you know, if I could take time and respond to Patrick’s posts, but no, that’s not possible. I will respond to Patrick’s post, however, but I’m going to stop being annoyed by useless people engaging in baseless speculation.

    SEK (74bb56)

  74. ==…despite your reciting “Invictus” under your breath.==

    Simon, that has to be one of the coolest lines ever on a blog. Kudos.

    elissa (7047a4)

  75. He does a pitch perfect impression of Nathan Thurm, the oily mouthpiece played by Martin Short.

    narciso (3fec35)

  76. SEK’s urbane
    he’s chillaxin’ with shizzle
    on teh down low peeps

    Colonel Haiku (f09d7b)

  77. But he had time to do this

    Yes, I had time to write something before Patrick wrote this. I can’t believe I didn’t think to respond to something Patrick hadn’t written before I wrote something. I’m such an asshole.

    SEK (74bb56)

  78. “Chill, I implore you, dear boy.”
    – Scott Eric Kaufman

    Colonel Haiku (f09d7b)

  79. SEK became self-aware at precisely 6:03PM on 7/22/13…

    Colonel Haiku (f09d7b)

  80. (Also, I’m under no obligation to respond to this post before I write anything else. As Neil Gaiman said of G.R.R. Martin, he’s not your bitch. If I’m inspired to write about something else before responding to this, I’m free to do so without anyone claiming that I’m “avoiding” the issue. [Which some of you — you know who you are — will no doubt do.] Some posts take longer to research and write than others, and if you don’t understand that, well, you’re not anybody’s target audience.)

    SEK (74bb56)

  81. SEK became self-aware at precisely 6:03PM on 7/22/13…

    WRONG.

    SEK (74bb56)

  82. Some posts take longer to research and write than others…

    you certianly fooled us with your recent w*rk.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  83. i am pro-chilling and also I am pro moving on dot org quick like a bunny.

    Misters zimmerman and trayvon were like ill-fated ships what passed on a sidewalk and explored the advantages and disadvantages of asymmetric conflict resolution (zimmerman had a Firearm).

    The important thing is that we all earned a lot about how other people live especially in Florida, which is where this happened.

    For example a lot of people here in Los Angeles take froyo for granted and I have to tell them there’s lots of towns in America where you can’t get froyo AT ALL you have to drive to a different town.

    So as you can see you can’t impose your own expectations on other people in far away places and you just have to let people work stuff out.

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  84. Oh, you make me laugh, SEK. You take yourself so seriously.

    Feel free not to respond. The problem is, I will bet you more than one commenter (not me!) could write your response for you. Just with a little less twee smug superiority. You are really good at that.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  85. Colonel – Acamadamianuts like SEK prefer to keep digging. They call it “research” and have haughty laughs with each other as to their superior intellect.

    The sad thing is we keep paying for them to keep on keepin’ on.

    Ed from SFV (962ab6)

  86. Oh, here is a clue-bat: quoting Neil Gaiman about GRR Martin right after Comic Con doth not impress folks.

    But you did make me laugh.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  87. hey feets!

    vanilla froyo is racist… just wanted you to know.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  88. *learned* a lot I mean not *earned* a lot

    also I think faraway should be one word but that’s kinda nitpicky

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  89. it’s all about the toppings my friend

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  90. ‘It’s Westeros’, Simon, btw, the subtext of W’s head in that scene, in GoT, that doesn’t mean anything I’m sure.

    narciso (3fec35)

  91. There is a double standard here. When Michael Ramirez makes an ANALOGY (see Simon Jester’s link), SEK gets to call it an EQUIVALENCE. That gives him a chance to beat his chest about how awful Ramirez is for EQUATING Al Sharpton’s lies to lynching.

    But when SEK makes an analogy (Zimmerman’s racial profiling to a guy yelling “nigger” at a group of black men) I don’t get to say he is suggesting Zimmerman is racist.

    It’s a double standard: the type of rank and transparent sophistry I have come to expect from people of his ilk.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  92. Since it’s going to take SEK such a long time to research his post that he can’t even reveal my error in a well-phrased sentence, I will take that as an acknowledgement that he didn’t do any of this research before making confident pronouncements about Zimmerman’s racism.

    Oh, I’m sorry. About Zimmerman’s using race to “color his judgment when it came to young black men with whom he wasn’t personally acquainted” in a manner analogous to screaming the n-word at a group of black men. Which certainly has NOTHING to do with any suggestion whatsoever that Zimmerman might be racist in any way. No, sir!

    The point is: we now have an acknowledgement that he didn’t do the research before painting Zimmerman as a racial profiler. The fact that it will take him time to read the research and possibly acknowledge his errors devise some sophistry to respond to this post without grappling with its central points, shows he has not thought the issue through.

    But hey, I’ll give him time. I guess he’s busy these days, and I mean that sincerely. Give him as long as he needs.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  93. You’re a good man Patterico for putting in all the time to research this stuff, and synthesize it for us. Lord knows the MSM ain’t gonna do it.

    If I were George Zimmerman, and my reputation were being savaged by lies, half-truths, speculations based on lies and half-truths, and I were being threatened with death by self-proclaimed peace activists (irony alert!), I’d sure hope there was someone like you out there to do this sort of blogging on behalf of the truth, and inherently on my behalf.

    Good stuff, Counselor.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  94. Dustin, I’m not ignoring this discussion — See, I’m still here! — I’m just not willing to have it here for reasons I’ve outlined to Patrick. I will, however, respond to this post in time.

    Comment by SEK (74bb56) — 7/22/2013 @ 1:49 pm

    Holy crap it worked.

    Dustin (ce0303)

  95. There is a double standard here.

    No, there isn’t. Ramirez’s cartoon makes no sense on its own terms, given that trees aren’t the ones who do the lynching. I noted that it makes no sense, which means the only appeal it could have was as an image of a lynching.

    But when SEK makes an analogy (Zimmerman’s racial profiling to a guy yelling “nigger” at a group of black men) I don’t get to say he is suggesting Zimmerman is racist.

    I didn’t make an analogy. I pointed out what complaining about the outcome of a fight you yourself instigated sounds like to other people. I explicitly said that I don’t think Zimmerman’s a racist, because I don’t think racism, so overtly defined, is at issue here.

    the type of rank and transparent sophistry I have come to expect from people of his ilk.

    Play to the home crowd, Patrick. That’ll certainly encourage people who disagree with you to comment here. I mean, I’m “of [an] ilk”! A rank and sophist one at that! Boy howdy, I sure think I’ll meet an honest listen here.

    Or would you rather I not respond? Because your tone and behavior tonight certainly indicates that you’d rather declare victory, take your toys and march out the sandbox.

    SEK (74bb56)

  96. I jest, but hopefully a real discussion can be had, with an emphasis away from ‘ivory tower’ and ‘Zimmerman’s defenders are pretending not to see racism’ arguments, no disrespect intended to either side.

    Dustin (ce0303)

  97. Of course, it is Sharpton has defamed or outright destroyed lives, this has given him street cred in the Democratic party, instead of the proper shunning,

    narciso (3fec35)

  98. I do not think anyone responding by claiming SEK is going to ignore the issue is unjustified given the nature of political debate. I consider myself libertarian and though I do have right leanings, I also have thoughts that oppose the right (though I oppose the left more). I have challenged several prominent people on Twitter to debates. The tally thus far is two prominent liberals ignoring and/or blocking me. One prominent conservative sending minions after me (and then denying it). The other prominent conservative agreeing to debate on his show and then ignoring me when I asked for the date and time. This is typical of politics.

    I do not think anyone on here expects a drawn out response immediately, but we are all too aware that often times a person is challenged that they simply pick apart tiny minute details of the counterargument and then hide until they feel the issue has been forgotten.

    ratbeach (f5aad4)

  99. SEK became self-aware at precisely 6:03PM on 7/22/13…

    WRONG.

    Comment by SEK

    Yes… it was at precisely 6:02PM…

    ColonelHaiku (f09d7b)

  100. And that was before I saw your latest comment. I’m done for the evening. Please continue to insult me in my absence, knowing I won’t respond, as that’s the best way to encourage me to invest more time I don’t really have in this particular conversation.

    SEK (74bb56)

  101. Calling people racists, insinuating they are racists, and then getting the vapors who me I would never do that I am pure of soul and would not ever dream of calling someone a racist I just note that they do and say things that a racist would and espouse policies and positions that are racist in effect but I did not call you a racist is one of his rhetorical nuance BS be likes to play around with. He is too cute by half, hipster d-bag.

    JD (b63a52)

  102. SEK, there’s no Candy Crowley here to bail you out with a lifeline lifelie.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  103. SEK gets to determine what the only appeal of his drawing is. Not Ramirez. The only appeal.

    JD (b63a52)

  104. It’s that ‘clown nose on, (when they don’t wan’t to be held accountable,) and clown nose off, when the likes of Stewart wants to pontificate, the fact the audio transcript was edited multiple times, the police station tape was altered, the list of call, compressed, all part of the building of the narrative,

    narciso (3fec35)

  105. I swear, this SEK guy is a self parody.

    Simon Jester (a510c3)

  106. I swear, this SEK guy is a self parody.

    Comment by Simon Jester (a510c3) — 7/22/2013

    He really is pretty ridiculous. He preemptively insults everyone who disagrees with him, and then is extremely huffy about the terms under which we would be privileged with response… to what certainly appears to be a powerful objection to his claims. Kinda tacky.

    Dustin (ce0303)

  107. I am crushed. SEKs doesn’t give a f@ck what I think. The greatness of SEKs is so far beyond my ability to comprehend. To call him a passive aggressive race baiting verbose sophist would be an insult to passive aggressive race baiting verbose sophists.

    JD (b63a52)

  108. 3) I don’t inhabit the ivory tower.

    My definition of “ivory tower” is a person who observes trends such as the following report from CBS News, considers him or herself very liberal and tolerant — meaning he or she reflects a larger cross-section of America in 2013 compared with America in the 1950s or 1930s, etc — and therefore heartily disapproves of and expresses puzzlement by such trends, yet makes personal decisions that contribute to the very same trends described below.

    I won’t say anything about the millions of do-gooders like Barack and Michelle Obama — referring again to truly liberal and tolerant (at least as they define such words) people — throughout the US who choose not to send their own children to schools where most of the student body will look like Obama’s son if he had a son.

    cbsnews.com, June 2012: The real estate market today reflects an ugly, if often forgotten, truth: Residential segregation in the U.S. is alive and well. Although that problem is commonly thought of as a relic of America’s racially troubled past, a recent study shows that fewer black and white families are today moving into multi-ethnic neighborhoods.

    “We pay a lot of attention to this proliferation of multi-ethnic neighborhoods, but they are still only a small part of the overall inter-neighborhood mobility picture for blacks and whites,” said Kyle Crowder, a professor of sociology at the University of Washington and lead author of the study, in a statement. “Blacks tend to originate in neighborhoods with very high concentrations of blacks and, when they move, they tend to move to other places that have very high concentrations of blacks. Their typical destination is not a multi-ethnic neighborhood. The same goes for whites.”

    Indeed, segregation appears to be on the rise despite an overall increase in the number of racially and ethnically mixed neighborhoods, which the study defines as areas whose populations were at least 10 percent black, 10 percent Hispanic or Asian, and 40 percent white.

    Of the 9,940 moves black families who moved from all types of neighborhoods in the same time period, 44 percent were to predominantly black neighborhoods. Five percent of these moves were to mostly white neighborhoods, 17.7 percent were to multi-ethnic districts and 33.6 percent were to other types of neighborhoods.

    The numbers are even more skewed for white families. Of the nearly 5,000 moves white families made from predominantly white neighborhoods over the same time period, three-quarters were to other primarily white neighborhoods.

    Mark (83be92)

  109. On in the frankly disingenuous category, Schuster is joining Al Jazeera, they’re really digging at the bottom of the barrel.

    narciso (3fec35)

  110. “… I’m such an asshole.”

    Comment by SEK (74bb56) — 7/22/2013

    Okay, you’ve convinced me.

    Colonel Haiku (25ee79)

  111. really SEK
    you took us on a wild ride
    pucker advantage

    Colonel Haiku (25ee79)

  112. trees aren’t the ones who do the lynching

    You are amazingly perspective, sir.

    Slartibartfast (d739b2)

  113. an asshole says ‘what?’
    SEK ponders question
    we all know answer

    Colonel Haiku (25ee79)

  114. before you all say
    “dont be tough on SEK!”
    I must grade on curve

    Colonel Haiku (25ee79)

  115. On in the frankly disingenuous category, Schuster is joining Al Jazeera, they’re really digging at the bottom of the barrel.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35)

    His “speaks like a dog eating peanut butter” act will have them reaching for their swords in no time at all.

    Colonel Haiku (25ee79)

  116. Ass handed to him … and still clueless how to respond.

    SPQR (74e755)

  117. People like Scott Kaufman apparently immediately think of — and hone in on — the race or ethnicity of groups or individuals they’re dealing with more than the prevailing ideology of such groups or individuals. In my case, when I scrutinize the following and the nature of such people, the thing that first sticks out in my mind is that one is dealing with very liberal or very leftwing humans.

    news.investors.com, Thomas Sowell, July 8, 2013: I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white. Apparently other Americans also recognize that the sources of racism are different today from what they were in the past. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 31% of blacks think that most blacks are racists, while 24% of blacks think that most whites are racist.

    The difference between these percentages is not great, but it is remarkable nevertheless. After all, generations of blacks fought the white racism from which they suffered for so long. If many blacks themselves now think that most other blacks are racist, that is startling.

    The moral claims advanced by generations of black leaders — claims that eventually touched the conscience of the nation and turned the tide toward civil rights for all — have now been cheapened by today’s generation of black “leaders,” who act as if it is all just a matter of whose ox is gored.

    Perhaps most disturbing of all, just 29% of Americans as a whole think race relations are getting better, while 32% think race relations are getting worse. The difference is too close to call, but the fact that it is so close is itself painful — and perhaps a warning sign for where we are heading.

    None of this is unique to blacks or to the U.S. In various countries and times, leaders of groups that lagged behind, economically and educationally, have taught their followers to blame all their problems on other people — and to hate those other people.

    latimes.com, April 2013: …[Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s] support for “spreading the Jews thin” may hold the key to understanding a subject that has been at the center of controversy for decades: the American government’s tepid response to the Holocaust.

    Every president’s policy decisions are shaped by a variety of factors, some political, some personal. In Roosevelt’s case, a pattern of private remarks about Jews, some of which I recently discovered at the Central Zionist Archives in Jerusalem and from other sources, may be significant.

    In 1923, as a member of the Harvard board of directors, Roosevelt decided there were too many Jewish students at the college and helped institute a quota to limit the number admitted. In 1938, he privately suggested that Jews in Poland were dominating the economy and were therefore to blame for provoking anti-Semitism there. In 1941, he remarked at a Cabinet meeting that there were too many Jews among federal employees in Oregon. In 1943, he told government officials in Allied-liberated North Africa that the number of local Jews in various professions “should be definitely limited” so as to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.”

    …This attitude dovetails with what is known about FDR’s views regarding immigrants in general and Asian immigrants in particular…. In a series of articles for the Macon (Ga.) Daily Telegraph and for Asia magazine in the 1920s, he warned against granting citizenship to “non-assimilable immigrants” and opposed Japanese immigration on the grounds that “mingling Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results.” He recommended that future immigration should be limited to those who had “blood of the right sort.”

    Mark (83be92)

  118. “… I’m such an asshole.”

    Comment by SEK (74bb56) — 7/22/2013

    Okay, you’ve convinced me.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (25ee79) — 7/22/2013 @ 7:02 pm

    😆

    A winner we have!

    Yoda (ee1de0)

  119. SEK,

    Take your time.

    But please. Respond to my key points head on when you do.

    Patterico (aa8a4d)

  120. You are just preaching to your choir, Patterico.

    Unlike the folks who post on “Crooks and Liars,” of course.

    Simon Jester (87cabf)

  121. Okay, SEK, let’s say — for the sake of argument — that you somehow manage to present a convincing argument that Zimmerman ‘racially profiled’ Martin; that Z specifically thought that Martin was “up to no good” because M was black.

    AND?

    Going forward, this means what?

    Icy (3470aa)

  122. There’s a pattern here obvious to anyone without an investment in not seeing it.

    Yes, there is an obvious pattern, SEK. The pattern is yours.

    Too bad you’re so invested in denying it.

    Steve57 (2dd692)

  123. Icy, not a f’ing thing.

    SPQR (768505)

  124. Yes, there is an obvious pattern, SEK. The pattern is yours.

    Why are you so busy denying you’re a racist?

    See, it’s this simple:

    My name is Slartibartfast, and being a person of generally Anglo-Saxon descent, everything I do that deliberately or otherwise adversely affects a person of color (except for possibly white hispanics, who have no color) comes from racism, while everything I do that might (probably by accident) benefit a person of color is something that is owed to that person as payment in exchange for previous adversity my (or that of other people of pallor) racism has inflicted upon them, or as advance payment for future racism.

    It’s not that hard. Just admit it.

    Slartibartfast (4090b3)

  125. i’m not racist: i hate everyone.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  126. No, there isn’t. Ramirez’s cartoon makes no sense on its own terms, given that trees aren’t the ones who do the lynching. I noted that it makes no sense, which means the only appeal it could have was as an image of a lynching.

    You criticized Ramirez’s cartoon as an equivalence. You even used the word EQUIVALENT:

    Michael Ramirez’s “Lynched” serves a single purpose: to allow the overwhelmingly white readership of NRO to believe that the imagined lynching of an abstract value is morally equivalent to the actual lynching of actual human beings

    Indeed, the entire theme of your post is that NRO readers are enjoying the chance to feel pleasure at the image of a lynching.

    Meanwhile, you sure do make an analogy with your video of someone yelling the n-word. You deny it above, saying:

    I didn’t make an analogy. I pointed out what complaining about the outcome of a fight you yourself instigated sounds like to other people. I explicitly said that I don’t think Zimmerman’s a racist, because I don’t think racism, so overtly defined, is at issue here.

    The italics are yours; you italicize the words “sounds like” because you are trying to make the point that you didn’t make an ANALOGY — goodness, no! — you said that two things that weren’t equivalent SOUND LIKE they are equivalent to certain people.

    Except, that’s not what you said. You DID make an analogy because you said an argument that Zimmerman could shoot Martin AMOUNTS TO an argument that a guy can yell the n-word at blacks and shoot them if that turns out to be a bad idea:

    But if you want to make that claim in order to win an argument with someone on the Internet, by all means, please tell me about call from 2007 in which he reported seeing two Hispanic males with a “slim jim,” or the one from 2009 in which he didn’t identify the race of the people “going into the pool and trashing the bathroom.” Feel free to ignore the cluster of calls immediately before the shooting in favor of the ones from three and five years previous, because we all know that beliefs don’t develop and concretize over time. While you’re at it, continue to insist that people who instigate confrontations are in no way culpable for their outcome. You know why? Because to everyone but you your argument amounts to this guy:

    [Video of white guy yelling “nigger” at black people]

    Being in the moral right to shoot away should he decide that the danger he sought is more dangerous than he thought it’d be.

    It’s actually worded like an equivalence, not an analogy. I’m being generous to you by allowing it to be characterized as an analogy.

    Not it “sounds like” that to certain people. It “amounts to” the same thing to everyone in the world except the damned racist making the damned racist argument.

    In summary, you claim the right to make analogies (that are worded like equivalences!) and have them treated as analogies, but conservatives making OBVIOUS analogies (like a freaking political CARTOON) get the time-honored sophistry of treating the analogy like an equivalence.

    We’re not stupid here, SEK. When you do make your argument — and please, take your time and don’t view this comment as rushing you — kindly don’t rewrite your arguments. We tend to notice such things.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  127. It is not about the truth, it ia about ‘narrative’ which is the opposite of truth, Sharpton can never be held accountable for the lives and reputations he’s destroyed, Zimmerman must be held responsible for his choice, so that no one ever consider self defense.

    narciso (3fec35)

  128. Interesting – just listened to one (or two – th second started playing automatically) previous calls to police that George Zimmerman made before Feb 26,2012. They are not as long as the one that was made on February 26, 2012.

    I think one must be at another link.

    This one here is from August 3, 2011:

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68911949/News/Past-911-call-George-Zimmerman-reports-a-black-male-that-matches-robbery-suspect#gl-62773735

    Call is only 1 minute and 42 seconds. Apparently from 18:45:34 to 18:47:09

    1. George Zimmerman was also asked what race someone is and what he was were wearing.

    2. On that call too, George Zimmerman did NOT WANT
    TO GIVE OUT HIS ADDRESS because he didn’t know where the person was. (worry that it could be overheard?)

    On that call, unlike the Feb 26 call, he did not give it out but gave out the address of the Clubb house instead..

    I heard another call too. This was one where George Zimmerman recognized the person. He seemed to be collecting trash, but he was also worried about burglary. He doesn’t know what he’s doing. Just like Trayvon Martin. George Zimmerman says he doesn’t want to approach him personally.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  129. More misinformation department:

    There is a claim on the talk page of the Wikipedia artiocle on Sanford, Florida that Sanford was the setting for several movies: My Girl (1991), Passenger 57 (1992), Wilder Napalm (1993), Matinee (2003), and Monster (2003). It is clearly not the main setting.

    Maybe mentioned in them?

    I can only find a reference to a “Florida hometown” in Wikipedia article on Wilder Napalm which was a flop. Monster takes place in Florida but the real life case it was based on had no connection with Sanford.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  130. Patterico #130: I think it is great that you are engaging with and responding to SEK’s silly sophistries. But I find it humorous how—when you look over his website and postings to be found via Google—how often SEK lumps together people with whom he disagrees.

    Yet notice how sensitive he is to being lumped together with any other group.

    This is typical in academia: all in lockstep, while insisting that they are independent thinkers. Like the oh-so-independent world-weary tweens who shop for the same clothing at Hot Topic.

    The truth is, most academics believe that they are smarter and more sophisticated than non-academics (heck, folks, a PhD is just a five or six year fraternity initiation; trust me on that…some academics are smart, and some are not, like any other profession). Further, most academics think they are forces for “cosmic good,” which is called “social justice” these days. Sigh.

    Remember Tom Sowell’s great book, which is relevant to this: “The Quest for Cosmic Justice.”

    Here is a summary Sowell wrote:

    http://www.tsowell.com/spquestc.html

    The point is simple. If you believe that you are a cosmic force of good, what does that make people who oppose you? For all the self-puffery that academicians preen about in their metaphorical mirrors, they really do the things they abhor in others: make snap judgements, thoughtless quips, and tend to see things in a right/wrong way.

    Anyway, SEK clearly believes he is all that and a bag of chips, and so people who disagree with him aren’t simply wrong. They are to be sneered at and reviled.

    I wish him well. University teaching is not easy, and academia has all kinds of weird nooks and crannies that bedevil even the most virtuous of fellow travelers. Every job has its negatives; the bad part about academia is how often it claims not to be like any other job.

    But if SEK gets to call other people racist (even with his so-sly prevarications regarding such labels; read his comments on blogs and you will see what he actually thinks), why, other people get to call him on what they consider to be his nonsense.

    Again, don’t take my or SEK’s word for it. Look to Google and see the kinds of interactions he has had; the ways in which he has engaged others.

    To be sure, I can be criticized for how I engage others. But…I do not claim to be smarter or more sophisticated than others, and I most certainly do not call people with whom I disagree “racists.”

    I think that “racist” is the new “fascist”: a word you can toss at a political opponent like a bomb to hurt them. Not definitionally accurate.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  131. I also recommend Sowell’s “Vision the Anointed” and “A Conflict of Visions” to help explain this academic mindset.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  132. Isn’t it striking that “fascist” was not a bad word on The Left between the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and the initiation of Operation Barbarossa?

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  133. “Discrimination” used to be a longer term. THat is it is shorthand for arbitrary race discrimination.

    People use the word discrimination as if it is an inherent evil or lamentable failing, when in fact prudent people and good people discriminate and should discriminate.

    Arbitrary race discrimination is perhaps necessarily a failing or wrong. It is not right to treat individuals as members of a herd, except as a starting point to individualized treatment, such as when there is a rational basis for some altered treatment (i.e., generally disparate response to specific medications or treatment modalities, or risks for specific diseases).

    SEK attempts to conflate a non-arbitrary distinction with an arbitrary one. Blackness, if it had anything to do with George Zimmerman’s calls, had less to do with his selective suspicions than a. what known criminals in the area looked like b. what people up to no good in a neighborhood look like (aimless loitering in bad weather, looking into houses) and c. giving an accurate description upon request.

    SEK will not admit that the distinction is either incidental, or was not arbitrary but reasonable and rational in real time in a real neighborhood with a real problem.

    It must be a fixation with black criminality, is SEK’s apparent assertion (though I’ve noticed that rests on shifting sands.)

    But it isn’t “wrong”, unless it is arbitrary. ITS APPROPRIATE.

    SEK knows Trayvon was a violent loadie and that his actions would have drawn suspicion from anyone aware of the pattern of break-ins in that neighborhood. And barring some evidence that GZ brandished his gun and/or attempted to detain TM, the “insult” of being followed was no justification for a physical retaliation. None.

    and given Trayvon’s own words that “Black people don’t call police, they call a cousin” it seems likely that T decided police were the last people he wanted to show up. TM would punish the person who spotted TM up to no good, the person who could get him in trouble and get him kicked out of yet another home.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  134. Forgive caveman grammar. I have a very bad headache as is usual these days.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  135. ““Discrimination” used to be a longer term. THat is it is shorthand for arbitrary race discrimination.” =

    The word “discrimination” as it is commonly used today is a shorthand for the longer complex phrase “arbitrary race discrimination.”

    Sorry for that.

    Sarahw (b0e533)

  136. Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 7/23/2013 @ 12:49 pm

    barring some evidence that GZ brandished his gun and/or attempted to detain TM, the “insult” of being followed was no justification for a physical retaliation.

    On the walkthrough Feb 27 linked by elissa, there are some contradictions bewteen what GZ says there and what was on the tape of the nonemergency call. (GZ even says he was still on the phone for a long time, while he looked for an address and that he reported TM was gone and that heh was askled if he still wanted a policeman and he said yes. None of that happened on the call that was released.)

    The call must have ended somehow (according to GZ) because when TM encountered him he reached for his cellphone (but went into the wrong pocket)

    But while there are problems with that, the account of the struggle seems to be consistent with all the interviews his family members gave.

    There are some differences from the way I pictured it.

    His head was slammed down not at the start, but
    when he tried to get up. His body was on the grass but his head was on the cement at that time, he thinks.

    This was after he had first started yelling for help. And TM had said “Shut the F—” up”

    GZ thought he was going to lose consciousness.

    When he got off the concrete somebody opened the door, And said I’ll call 911 and GZ said no he needs help. (now)

    So that sort of fits with Jonathan Good.

    GZ said TM saw his gun and said “you’re going to die motherf*” and reached for his gun.

    And that’s when he shot TM.

    He didn’t think he hit him. TM first got up. He said words to the effect you got me – he didn’t remember exactly. He thought TM had given up.

    Then he got on top of TM, stretched out his arms and when a person came, asked if he was a a policeman (he was not) and then wanted his help in restraining TM.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  137. NO

    Yoda (ee1de0)

  138. Can I just say what a relief to find out an individual who truly knows what they are speaking about on the net. You certainly realize how you can bring an issue to light and make it important. Much more people ought to check this out and understand this side of one’s story. It is surprising you’re not more well-liked given that you most certainly possess the gift.

    Sapphire Radeon HD 7990 6GB (5f3a92)

  139. 679162 269650This website is often a walk-through like the info you wanted in regards to this and didnt know who to question. Glimpse here, and youll certainly discover it. 851322

    WoQzTkfh5Rentd (5a1157)

  140. Sammy, how do you reconcile that NONE of GZ’s allegations about what was said during the scuffle were recorded in the several-second 911 calls? (not before the shot, not after the shot)

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  141. GZ’s head was being “pounded into the ground” and he came away with 2cm and .5cm cuts that get ‘treated’ with over-sized bandaids, two puncture wounds at the end of his nose, and some swelling (intact septum, intact mucous membrane=no break)?
    TM had a 1/4×1/8 abrasion on the 4th finger of his left hand after supposedly 30 punches?
    Not one defensive wound on GZ, not a bruise on his hands, not a scratch on TM to show that GZ tried to stop the supposed attack, in a supposed fight for his life?

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  142. Obsess much, tiffy? Continuing to less lies and half-truths after a jury bitch-slapped your Narrative seems kind of desperate.

    JD (202fb3)

  143. Which was a lie or half-truth?

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  144. Not one defensive wound on GZ, not a bruise on his hands, not a scratch on TM to show that GZ tried to stop the supposed attack, in a supposed fight for his life?

    All that meant was that GZ was overpowered quickly by an assailant who had taken him by surprise. Before he could land a blow, he was on the ground and receiving punches to his face. At that point, he was in reasonable fear for his life.

    Chuck Bartowski (ad7249)

  145. Only if you believe GZ’s story. Which the jury did.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  146. Only if you believe GZ’s story. Which the jury did.

    There was no evidence to the contrary. Unless you want to engage in base speculation, which you apparently do.

    Chuck Bartowski (ad7249)

  147. Tell you what, Tifosa, have someone jump you in an alley, push you to the ground and start punching your face. And then try to tell us that you aren’t in reasonable fear for your life.

    Chuck Bartowski (ad7249)

  148. Here’s me: scratch, hit bit, scream, my fingernails are broken, I’m shaken for WEEKS maybe months or years.
    aka, there’s some sign that I didn’t want this to happen

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  149. So, GZ reacted a little differently than you would have. Adrenaline and shock do different things to different people. There’s absolutely no evidence that GZ set out to kill anyone that night. There’s absolutely no evidence that GZ started the fight. But there is evidence that GZ was beaten up by TM. And there’s an eye witness who put TM on top of GZ, raining punches down on him.

    Just because you think something is true doesn’t make it true.

    Chuck Bartowski (ad7249)

  150. Here’s who knows. George.
    My statement before the verdict: he’ll be acquitted, gain the remain 33 pounds, and carry the extra 158 pounds with him, forever.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  151. You aren’t making any sense, Tifosa. You used to bring game here, but now you’re just babbling incoherencies.

    Saying GZ would be acquitted before the verdict was hardly a huge insight. Anyone who had followed the trial would have seen that there was absolutely no evidence that GZ had been the aggressor, that GZ was in fact in reasonable fear for his life or great bodily harm, and that this event was unfortunate but a clear case of lawful self-defense. That you conceded to the real world is nothing to crow about.

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  152. you’re just babbling incoherencies.

    that’s tiffy’s MO.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  153. Chuck, there was actually no physical evidence that a punch, even one, was thrown by TM to start this.
    George is a liar.
    But is there a need to review any of that?
    In terms of this article, GZ told us what he was thinking, we know he profiled Trayvon as “people who victimize the neighborhood.”
    (plays tape 1:28 to 1:34)
    Serino: That statement. These assholes…what’s behind that?
    Zimmerman: People that victimize the neighborhood.

    No, Trayvon was a kid walking home from the store. period.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  154. Obsess much, tiffy?

    The true oddness about people like him/her, is that even though they think otherwise, they’re, in fact, surprisingly ruthless and inhumane. That’s what upside-down, ass-backwards sympathies do to a human.

    Mark (938403)

  155. No, Trayvon was a kid walking home from the store. period.

    Wrong. Saint Thug Life was a stoned out, violent, drug abusing criminal who was stupid enough to attack a total stranger in a state that allows CCW, and he got what he deserved.

    maybe if he hadn’t been a user of a drug that causes the same sort of psychotic breaks as ketamine or PCP, he might still be alive, but he was raised in a culture that celebrates failure, violence, criminal behavior and drug use, with predictable results.

    maybe if his so called parents had put as much effort into raising him to be a productive member of society as they have to getting rich of his death, he’d still be alive today.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  156. Doesn’t matter what we think, George called him a kid in his late teens.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  157. Chuck, there was actually no physical evidence that a punch, even one, was thrown by TM to start this.

    Yes there is: the badly bloodied nose of George Zimmerman. That and the eye-witness statement which was never rebutted.

    Here’s what you’ll say: that there was none of TM’s DNA on Zimmerman. Well, DNA doesn’t work like that. Not every contact leaves DNA behind. The lack of DNA is not an indication of a lack of a punch.

    If Martin didn’t punch Zimmerman in the nose, how did Zimmerman’s nose get so bloodied as to look broken?

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  158. No, Trayvon was a kid walking home from the store. period.

    That broke a creepy ass cracker’s nose, and bashed his head into a concrete sidewalk. And he wasn’t just a kid. He was a thug.

    JD (202fb3)

  159. The EMT didn’t say “badly bloodied. ” In fact, the EMT report said the bleeding was “minor,” and normal mucous membrane.
    Look at the pic. Blood was coming from the two pin-pricks on the end of his nose, not from inside.

    Hey your guy’s “free,” celebrate good times, no? :)

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  160. Hey your guy’s “free,” celebrate good times, no?

    He’s not “my guy”. I have no attachment to George Zimmerman. And the only thing I am taking satisfaction in is that justice was served. I’m not celebrating.

    You’ve gone from babbling incoherencies to accusing me of thoughts and feelings that I don’t hold. If you’re incapable of arguing in good faith, please say so now, so that I won’t waste any further time on you.

    Look at the pic.

    I did. It looked like he got punched in the nose.

    You didn’t answer my question: if Martin did not punch Zimmerman in the nose, how did it get bloodied?

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  161. Good question. One theory may be gun recoil. Read about the pf9. The smaller the gun, the less control over the recoil. Plus GZ supposedly didn’t have any bracing in his arm.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  162. Tifosa, these are EMTs. Minor means non-life-threatening.

    And seriously, if GZ was looking for someone to kill, why wouldn’t he approach with a drawn gun and avoid getting his ass kicked? The narrative here makes no sense.

    I also don’t get your line about extra 158lbs. Are you saying GZ symbolically ate TM? That’s utterly and totally bizarre.

    OmegaPaladin (f4a293)

  163. tifosa, you are the liar.

    Disagreeing on the severity of the injury does not refute the point above that your claim of “no evidence” is false. Brazenly and intentionally false, as you know that the injury existed.

    SPQR (768505)

  164. No evidence that any injury was caused by TM. None.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  165. Which was a lie or half-truth?
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 4:52 am

    — It IS hard to keep them straight after awhile, ain’t it?

    Icy (76aa1f)

  166. tifosa, that’s another lie on your part tifosa.

    SPQR (768505)

  167. Yes SPQR.
    “tifosa you lie”
    Check.
    What is the physical evidence that TM caused an injury?

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  168. tifosa, goalpost moving – always a sign that the liar knows they are caught.

    SPQR (768505)

  169. No evidence that any injury was caused by TM. None.
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 7:56 am

    — In order to justify the claim of self-defense, was it necessary to prove that TM caused GZ’s injuries? Are you only allowed to feel threatened if someone is actually physically beating you?

    Icy (76aa1f)

  170. “In order to justify the claim of self-defense, was it necessary to prove that TM caused GZ’s injuries?”
    No.
    btw, you’re allowed to shoot even if you aren’t being beaten.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  171. Good question. One theory may be gun recoil. Read about the pf9. The smaller the gun, the less control over the recoil. Plus GZ supposedly didn’t have any bracing in his arm.
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 7:42 am

    — So . . . Tiffy is a-theorizin’ that the recoil from firing his 9mil drove the gun into GZ’s face with such force that it both bloodied his nose and drove his head into the concrete.

    Icy (76aa1f)

  172. Yep, a one-time bop. The force of the recoil is equal to the force coming from the other end.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  173. btw, you’re allowed to shoot even if you aren’t being beaten.
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 8:18 am

    — Right.

    And so, your point in claiming that there is no evidence that TM beat GZ is what?

    Icy (76aa1f)

  174. Incidentally, I’d think differently if there were: scrapes on the side of GZ’s head where he was supposedly held, more than one injury on his face, injuries on TM’s knuckles, scratches on TM’s hands where GZ tried to stop him…

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  175. Just that, Icy. That GZ was acquitted with no evidence that TM caused even a single of his injuries.
    Only that.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  176. No evidence that any injury was caused by TM. None.

    Lie. Eye witness evidence contradicts your claim.

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  177. Someone else obviously punched GZ and broke his nose. Someone else obviously was sitting on his chest bashing his head on the ground.

    JD (202fb3)

  178. Yep, a one-time bop. The force of the recoil is equal to the force coming from the other end.
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 8:22 am

    — From the Wikipedia article on recoil:

    Although energy must be conserved, this does not mean that the kinetic energy of the bullet must be equal to the recoil energy of the gun: in fact, it is many times greater. For example, a bullet fired from an M16 rifle has approximately 1763 Joules of kinetic energy as it leaves the muzzle, but the recoil energy of the gun is less than 7 Joules. Despite this imbalance, energy is still conserved because the total energy in the system before firing (the chemical energy stored in the propellant) is equal to the total energy after firing (the kinetic energy of the recoiling firearm, plus the kinetic energy of the bullet and other ejecta, plus the heat energy from the explosion). In order to work out the distribution of kinetic energy between the firearm and the bullet, it is necessary to use the law of conservation of momentum in combination with the law of conservation of energy.

    And yeah, I know what you said. Somehow, GZ managed to aim and pull the trigger without bracing his arm at all.
    That’s fine. Tell us another one.

    Icy (76aa1f)

  179. tifosa is not helping her cause– whatever it is– by continuing this nonsense. Prior to the trial and prior to a more balanced view of the case being made available to the public I had marginally more sympathy for the people like her who were repeating the already known lies and misrepresentations of the Crump/Sharpton gang. I thought it was possible many did not know better because they were trusting of the media narrative and were, as typical, too lazy to do their own thinking or their own wider research.

    But now, the info is out there. Very much so. The crafted lies and manufactured misrepresentations have been exposed, in many cases under oath and through original documents/testimony. The prosecutors have been exposed as either incompetents or charlatans, probably both. There are no words of contempt powerful enough to describe the baiters who drew in the grieving Martin family, used and corrupted them.

    People demanded a trial. They got a trial. Enough is enough.

    elissa (dbe7b9)

  180. The witness saw no blows land, and the physical evidence isn’t consistent with several MMA-style blows. George had only one injury on the front, two small on the back. No physical evidence TM that such a blow landed.
    Wait, TM was sitting on his chest? How did GZ get to the gun? How did TM even see a gun if he’s sitting on GZ’s chest?

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  181. Asked and answered tifosa. Many times in many places.

    elissa (dbe7b9)

  182. Just that, Icy. That GZ was acquitted with no evidence that TM caused even a single of his injuries.
    Only that.
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 8:27 am

    — He makes statements with no intended purpose whatsoever.

    He is . . . the least interesting man in the world.

    Icy (76aa1f)

  183. People demanded a trial. They got a trial. Enough is enough
    Sooooooo, why continuing articles in here?

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  184. tifosa,

    Perhaps you are focusing on physical evidence because you know the physical evidence was slight — Martin’s knuckles were scraped but that could have been caused by many things. But there was eyewitness testimonial evidence Martin injured Zimmerman. For instance, John Good’s testimony is evidence that Zimmerman’s injuries were caused by Martin.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  185. Did you happen to notice the original date on this thread? The thread that has been dead since 7/23?The thread which tifosa resurrected on August 7?

    Done.

    elissa (dbe7b9)

  186. And the reason we’re still talking about this case is too many people don’t grasp the evidentiary and legal issues presented in the case.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  187. Wait, TM was sitting on his chest? How did GZ get to the gun? How did TM even see a gun if he’s sitting on GZ’s chest?
    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 8:45 am

    — Are you asking these questions because, at this VERY late date, you still don’t know some of the basics of this case?

    Icy (76aa1f)

  188. The lunatic is in the thread …

    nk (875f57)

  189. commenting on a thread resurrects it? ahhhhhhhhh. #144 did that then.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  190. For a more interesting topic.

    Boycott. Please do not buy Wisconsin beer or dairy products. http://blog.heritage.org/2013/08/06/zero-dark-giggles-baby-deer-gets-the-swat-team-treatment/

    nk (875f57)

  191. You may also wish to discuss any nuance between “it’s our policy”, “we’re only following orders” and “because we f***ing can that’s why”.

    nk (875f57)

  192. 145. Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 3:23 am

    Sammy, how do you reconcile that NONE of GZ’s allegations about what was said during the scuffle were recorded in the several-second 911 calls? (not before the shot, not after the shot)

    What are you talking about? George Zimmerman said he was crying for help, and indeed there was crying for help. Their only conversation was before the fight began, or at very low volume.

    There was no phone call recorded dealing with what went on between George Zimemrman and Trayvon Martin at the start of the fight. Rachel Jeantel claims she wa son the phone with Trayvon at the time but that wasn’t and wouldn’t have been recorded, not even by the NSA. Only call to police got recorded.

    There is a discrepancy between what what George Zimmerman said he said in his call to police and what is recorded on the non-emergency call – so big that I wonder if maybe there is a missing call.

    Now Zimmerman claimed, or seemed to claim, that he was talking to police till almost the time when the gunshot came, and was being badgered for the address..but there is no such thing on the known call.

    The call from Zimmerman’s phone to police started at 7:09:34 EST and ended at 7:13:41 after 4 minutes and 7 seconds. T-Mobile later said its records indicated it started at 7:08 (time is always rounded down the lawyers seem to agree) and lasted for 5 minutes (it may be measured in half minute increments, since I heard that time given for the call to the Travon Martin family cell phone but on the other hand with another call to the Zimmerman phone the lawyers claimed it id measured in 1 minute increments, but it doesn’t make a difference here which it is)

    It may be that it took some time to actually speak to a dispatcher and the actual beginning of the call was at or before 7:08:59. Either way tme was measured five minutes would then mean that if it began in the 7:08 minute and lasted no more than 5 minutes and zero seconds after it began, and it could have commenced no earlier than 7:08:41 and no later than 7:08:59, giving a wait time till the recording began of between 35 and 53 seconds.

    A second call was placed at 7:18 and lasted 1 minute, meaning at least 1 second they said.

    Of course if time is rounded down and maybe not synchronized 100% that could be even in the 7:19 minute and might be an accidental redial. But this is AFTER the gunshot.

    There doesn’t seem to be any police record of that call. There might not be if nobody picked up.

    Now near the end of first call, at 7:13:36, after Zimmerman changes the plan to meet them at the mailboxes and instead asks them to call him when they are in the area, the dispatcher agrees t have the police call 407-435-2400 when they are in the area.

    I don’t know if this call was ever made, but if it was it was not recorded, but it should have been on GZs T-Mobile records. If it was placed the odds are high but not certain that I’d have heard of it. It is not mentioned in the initial police report. And I didn’t see the T-Mobile recods entered into evidence.

    Now, for the calls involving the other phone:

    A call to the phone identified as the one Trayvon Martin was using (probably correct since it was found at the scene) from the phone identified as the one Rachel Jeantel was using (which is more problematic) was placed at 6:54:16 and lasted for 17 minutes and 32 seconds, that is, till 7:11:48.

    If the times are synchronized, this would be right when George Zimmerman opened the door of hsi truck to chase after Trayvon Martin after he’d started running away from George Zimmernan’s truck which he’d approached.

    A second call from the phone identified as Rachel Jeantel’s was placed at 7:12:06, which would be less than five seconds after the point when George Zimmerman stopped running after Trayvon Martin.

    Presumably, to answer the phone, Trayvon Martin also stopped running. Logically, this would be after ducking down a side path, to stay out of view.

    That call lasted for 218 seconds, or 3 minutes and 38 seconds, or until 7:15:44.

    The gunshot was fired at about 7:16:55 and the first 911 call from the neighbors came around 7:16:05, and the fight started a bit before that.

    If Trayvon Martin stayed in place all the time he was on that second phone call, he might have confronted George Zimmerman when Zimmerman passed by him a second time, aftee either looking to see if he was still there, or a street sign, and this could have been heard by someone on the other end of that call if this happened around 7:15:35 to 7:15:45.

    7:15:44 when the call to the Martin phone ended is 2 minutes and 3 seconds after George Zimmerman’s call to the police ended.

    George Zimmerman I think said somewhere he attempted to place a call (or pick up his phone to continue talking) right before he was sucker punched by Trayvon Martin.

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  193. 146. Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 3:35 am

    not a scratch on TM to show that GZ tried to stop the supposed attack, in a supposed fight for his life?

    George Zimmerman was not trying to attack Trayvon Martin – he was trying to escape. (and to avoid getting hurt by the pounding. He had had some mixed martial arts training, and may have known something about how to avoud getting hurt by slowing down the impact of the blows)

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  194. I was talking about the 911 call that was recorded around the shot. No “you got me” after the shot, no you’re going to die before the shot although several seconds on either side of the shot were recorded.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  195. Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 7:06 am

    plays tape 1:28 to 1:34)
    Serino: That statement. These assholes…what’s behind that?
    Zimmerman: People that victimize the neighborhood.

    Do you have a link to that tape or a transcript?

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  196. 199. Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 9:29 am

    I was talking about the 911 call that was recorded around the shot. No “you got me” after the shot, no you’re going to die before the shot although several seconds on either side of the shot were recorded.

    How loud would any of these statements have been?

    But anyway I’m not sure how consistent GZ was that that was what was said, or even if he said that. I have some doubts about both of these remarks.

    The first one “you’re going to die” I don’t know where exactly GZ said that was said. I am not sure he is at all on record as saying that himself. Or how far ty=that was in advance of the gunshot. He’s said also that he thought TM was reaching for his gun.

    As for “you got me” I think GZ indicated that he didn’t remember exactly the words.

    There s a problem with a conversation with the police dispatcher that doesn’t fit the tape. There might be a problem with that, too.

    GZ could indeed not be telling or have told all the time, the absolute truth, which is a mistake in a circumstance like this.

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  197. Sammy #200,

    Scroll down to the Update at 9:55 AM.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  198. https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=1079
    but there are several.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  199. There is no question the gunshot came at the end of a fight that lasted more than 40 seconds, and that that ended the fight (and the screaming for help)

    That there are no injuries in Trayvon tends to prove he always had the advantage.

    If you want to imagine that GZ was not hurting TM but intimidating him with his gun, how do you explain the screaming for help, and the [erception of a struggle?

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  200. 150. Only if you believe GZ’s story. Which the jury did.

    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 5:37 am

    There was no other story to believe. The prosecution didn’t have one. That’s what made their closing arguments, and indeed their entire case, so pathetically weak. They like you were left trying to imagineer inconsistencies and lies out of thin air.

    I’ve heard the BS that GZ was the only witness and we’ll never know what happened, but again that’s happy horse****. Bogus claims of self-defense fail all the time. Even legitimate claims of self-defense claims fail all the time.

    If TM had a side of the story that would have refuted GZ it was the job of the prosecution to tell it. He had no side of the story. He was a thug who committed an assault at the very least.

    TM didn’t help the prosecutors because they were handicapped by the fact they had to worry about opening the door to letting all the evidence of his bad character and violent proclivities into evidence.

    161. Doesn’t matter what we think, George called him a kid in his late teens.

    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 7:15 am

    WTFO, tiffy? Seriously, WTFO? I’ve described Marines and Sailors as kids. Because sometimes 17, 18, and 19 year olds (in other words, those in their late teens) act like kids.

    But they’re still lethal.

    There are 16 and 17 year old inmates in adult prisons for committing murder under the exact same circumstances that forced GZ to defend his life.

    So other than in the fever swamp that is your imagination, tiffy, what significance can you imagine GZ’s statements to have.

    If you call the police to report about what turns out to be a six foot tall high school football player acting suspiciously and call him a kid, that means if he ends up thrashing you to the point putting you in fear for your life you can’t do anything about it?

    Steve57 (a65996)

  201. 200. 202 What update at 9:55 AM?

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  202. 194. Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 8:55 am

    commenting on a thread resurrects it? ahhhhhhhhh. #144 did that then.

    It puts it back on the home page, in the top ten.

    Other times it might just not get picked up. I kleft a commenbt about Weiner about how someone called back the New York Daily News after his interview was published last Tuesday because the paper had left out an important weasel word: BASICALLY.
    to make suire th

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  203. Weiner said it ended BASICALLY a year ago, but the word BASICALLY was not in the paper!!

    Sammy Finkelman (3915d0)

  204. 182. Someone else obviously punched GZ and broke his nose. Someone else obviously was sitting on his chest bashing his head on the ground.

    Comment by JD (202fb3) — 8/7/2013 @ 8:35 am

    O.J. brought that up at his recent parole hearing. He needs to be released so he can find GZ’s real assailant so he can prove GZ a LIAR!

    As he told the parole board, he’s going to devote the rest of his life to making sure the black man finally gets some justice in this racist country.

    Starting with finding the real killer. Then the other white hispanics who set the 21st century Emmitt Till up in this horrible miscarriage of justice.

    Although O.J. expressed that sentiment in more authentic and colorful ethnic language that the former movie star and sportscaster has been studying in prison so he can “keep it real.”

    Steve57 (a65996)

  205. Sammy,

    I gave you a link re: Zimmerman’s “victimize the neighborhood” quote and told you where to find it. You can also find it at the link tifosa gave you in comment 203.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  206. 199. I was talking about the 911 call that was recorded around the shot. No “you got me” after the shot, no you’re going to die before the shot although several seconds on either side of the shot were recorded.

    Comment by tifosa (1a5fa3) — 8/7/2013 @ 9:29 am

    Wow, tiffy, I think you’re onto something. Everyone knows cell phone manufacturers don’t build their products to meet a price point. They pack those babies full of the highest quality audio devices just so they can pick up every sound within dozens of yards of the device.

    Because of course in addition to driving up the cost nothing enhances a conversation between two people as also transmitting the details of every other conversation taking place in your immediate vicinity of that bar, coffee shop, or subway station.

    Seriously, tiffy? This is a mystery to you?

    Steve57 (a65996)

  207. Have you ever talked on a cell phone, tiffy?

    Steve57 (a65996)

  208. tiffy, does this guy fall into the “but someone called him a kid” rule that you imagine exists? The one that changes everything. Or something. I dunno. I’m not your therapist.

    http://www.elpasotimes.com/tablehome/ci_21843760/teen-accused-el-paso-officers-fatal-beating-indicted

    The 17-year-old arrested in the violent beating death of an El Paso police officer last month is now charged with capital murder, court records show.

    A state district court grand jury indicted Juan Antonio Gonzalez on Tuesday in connection with the brutal beating of Officer Jonathan Molina, 29, on Sept. 25 on a Central El Paso street. Molina died nine days after the attack.

    Because of his age, Gonzalez is not eligible for the death penalty. If convicted, he faces an automatic lifetime prison sentence.

    According to complaint affidavits filed by homicide detectives, Molina saw a young man use a key to scratch his silver Pontiac Grand Prix in the early evening of Sept. 25 as the teens were walking on a sidewalk

    …While Molina was talking, Gonzalez “struck the victim on the face and then grabbed his legs and threw him to the concrete. (Gonzalez) then got on top of the victim and continued to punch him in the face,” the document states.

    Police said that Molina was knocked unconscious when his head hit the ground, and that Gonzalez continued the assault despite Molina’s being unable to defend himself. Gonzalez ran off when witnesses went to help Molina, who was taken by ambulance to a hospital in critical condition.

    …According to court documents, Molina suffered a fractured skull, internal head injuries and multiple facial fractures.

    Bernie De La Rosa and Angela Corey have yet to weigh in on the insignificant nature of the scalp lacerations Officer Molina suffered prior to being knocked out while getting his head bashed against the concrete by the unarmed child. Which clearly meant that Officer Molina had no right to attempt self-defense until he had already been knocked out.

    Even after being knocked out, BDLR asserts, Officer Molina had no right to shoot Gonzalez because the unconscious officer could not say with certainty that the poor child intended to continue to beat him until he suffered permanent or life threatening injuries.

    It is clearly a huge overreaction to shoot a tender child until you’ve suffered such injuries.

    Besides, Gonzalez was suffering every child’s worst nightmare. Being followed at night by some unknown guy for the non-crime of walking while undocumented.

    Is there no justice for Juan Antonio Gonzalez, tiffy? Where’s the outrage at what this racist country is doing to this confused child?

    Steve57 (a65996)

  209. these days, anyone under the age of 30 is a “kid” to me…

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  210. Steve57: i posted this link on the Obama racist school thread, but it’s appropriate here now too

    http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2013/08/homeless_man_was_kicked_stompe.html

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  211. Late teens, GZ said on the call. In his apology he said he thought TM was ‘a little younger than me’ (28)

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  212. correction: “apology”

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  213. When your therapist told you that was a real breakthrough, tiffy, he/she certainly didn’t mean you had found an earth shattering crack in GZ’s assertion of self-defense.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  214. red, I love the part about how Dorsette felt “disrespected.”

    You know, after they went to antagonize and laugh at the homeless guy.

    Thug ethics: “How dare you disrespect me by not putting up with my ****.”

    Steve57 (a65996)

  215. tifosa, you making stuff up is not evidence. And you ignoring evidence that exists does not convert it to “no evidence”.

    Your continual fabrications in this case show that you will do anything and write anything to continue to maintain a delusion in your mind.

    SPQR (768505)

  216. What have I printed that’s made up?

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  217. All I want is the physical evidence that connects TM fist with GZ’s nose to knock him down. period.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  218. Or physical evidence that he caused any injury.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  219. I agree most with Icy, none was needed for this verdict.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  220. Seriously, tiffy? This is a mystery to you?
    Comment by Steve57 (a65996) — 8/7/2013 @ 9:57 am

    One of the largest, thickest books in the Universe:

    “mysteries to tiffy”

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  221. Obsess much, tiffy?

    JD (1b0ee3)

  222. In other words you want something that goes way, way beyond what is legally required to assert self-defence.

    Which would be impossible anyway since it was demonstrated at trial that the ME mishandled evidence leading to its destruction.

    On top of that you want to unconstitutionally shift the burden of proof to GZ and make him (or us) prove his innocence.

    Thanks for playing, tiffy.

    Guys, I think our job here is done.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  223. Or physical evidence that he caused any injury.

    Except the scrapes and bruises on his knuckles, you f**king liar.

    Ghost (996b5a)

  224. tifosa, you’ve made up physics in the dynamics of handgun recoil that don’t exist. And you’ve moved goal posts. And you’ve done burden shifting that it is required to others have the burden of disproving your baseless speculations.

    Grow up. Your act was ridiculous years ago.

    SPQR (768505)

  225. tiffy, you need to just get back to your meds and quit watching NCIS or CSI.

    There’s no such thing as “physical evidence that connects TM fist with GZ’s nose.”

    There are injuries consistent with that scenario. There is physical evidence consistent with that scenario. There would have/could have been even more physical evidence consistent with that scenario.

    But there is no such thing as evidence that actually connects TM’s fists with GZ’s nose.

    As you are demonstrating there is someone who can raise all sorts of silly ass questions about that evidence in attempts to raise ludicrous doubts. Not reasonable doubts, not even unreasonable doubts. Off-the-scale loony bin doubts.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  226. There would have/could have been even more physical evidence consistent with that scenario.

    Had not the ME mishandled the wet evidence.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  227. One 1/4×1/8 abrasion on the fourth finger of the left hand is not “scrapes and bruises” ghostdear.

    tifosa (1a5fa3)

  228. Tiffy just wants proof!

    Too bad she’s already seen the proof (she commented 14 minutes after the update with Martin’s autopsy).

    Because she’s a f**king liar, she claims the recoil from a single shot of a handgun is strong enough to break a man’s nose AND cause multiple lacerations on the back of the head.

    Yeah. That makes much more sense. Idiot.

    Ghost (996b5a)

  229. tifosa, an eyewitness saw Martin atop Zimmerman throwing punches.

    Now grow up.

    SPQR (768505)

  230. but…but…that would require tiffy to become an …..GASP…..Adult!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  231. One 1/4×1/8 abrasion on the fourth finger of the left hand is not “scrapes and bruises”

    I thought you said there was no evidence that Martin was beating Zimmerman? Now there is, but it makes more sense that the recoil from his handgun broke his nose and caused contusions on the back off his skull?

    What’s next, the second puncher on the grassy knoll?

    Ghost (996b5a)

  232. tifosa, since you know that there was an abrasion on his knuckle, we know you are a liar.

    SPQR (768505)

  233. Guys, tiffy is demonstrating why the age old system of justice we’ve inherited from the English common law constantly refers to standards of reasonableness.

    Because people like tiffy exist.

    Without people like tiffy, there’d be no reason to talk about reasonable doubt. There’d be no mention of reasonable person standards. There’d be no reason for voir dire.

    But because people like her exist, we have to have those safeguards to protect the rights of the accused (and that could be any of us one day) against people like her.

    So carry on, tiffy, you poor dear.

    Bless your heart, you’re just making us appreciate our system of justice all the more.

    Steve57 (a65996)

  234. 210. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/7/2013 @ 9:56 am

    I gave you a link re: Zimmerman’s “victimize the neighborhood” quote and told you where to find it.

    I didn’t realize it was a link and thought it was a comment left at 9:55 am here. This is interesting but I wanted where he talks about Trayvon and the gun.

    You can also find it at the link tifosa gave you in comment 203.

    Will look.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  235. You know, I think, George Zimmerman didn’t completely trust the police, and may have thought also that some of them may have been leaking to criminals.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  236. Tape 1 of the Feb 29, 2012 Detective Serino interview is at https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=1025

    Tape 2 p=1035 and Tape 3 p=1079

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  237. Serino says he called back 2- 3 weeks before, but there is only one record of a call on February 2, 2012. It does say he called back, but no separate record is created.

    At that time, George Zimmerman gave the police a wrong home address. I heard the tape of that call, he said he didn’t want to give it, but it sounded like he did.

    On Feb 29, GZ claims giving the wrong home address was not intentional:

    And I don’t know why, adrenalin was rushing, a thousand things went through my mind. I gave them what I thought was my address

    he said he waited for the police and then it hit him that he gave the wrong address. I am not sure where the tape of that call is now.

    When he first arounsed his suspicions Trayvon was looking at the same house which he’d called about before.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  238. Serino claims Trayvon was a good kid with a future – not a goon – found with a can of iced tea and a bag of Skittles, and about $40 in cash. [Later they were to say $22] with folks that care who was gonna be in avionautics – no criminal record and was mild mannered (!) Did that testimonial get to the jury?

    (What is true is that his folks cared, and there is no reason to suppose him to have been involved in any criminal activity in Sanford – he just got there, so he couldn’t be one of the local burglars there)

    Serino argues that because his hoodie was dark grey and his pants were beige he was not quite your prime suspect type, because the bad guys wear black on black. [Well, anyway, it is reasonable to suppose he wasn’t out to commit a crime]

    Ziommerman mentions another thought he had had – Trayvon didn’t look like someone training for marathon, because they do go out and train in the rain, but they’re running and he wasn’t.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  239. Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 8/8/2013 @ 2:00 pm

    **sooper facepalm with toe loop **
    Sammy, you really need to control your imagination.

    SPQR (ecf272)

  240. Serino says Zimmerman gave too high an estimate of the number of punches he took – it wasn’t 25 or 30. (He also lied about this possibly on video and saw Zimmerman didn’t think tghat was bad for him. Serino had alreday received an anonymous phone call that claimed to give the beginning of the fight. Serino keeps on referring to trayvon Martin as a child. Says he was not on drugs, which is correct AND that he had no violent background,which is incorrect, althouygh he qualifies it by saying no violent tendencies that we can find. But it was found out later.

    Zimmerman says that when he was punched he was stumbling and wound up on the ground.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  241. 245. Comment by SPQR (ecf272) — 8/8/2013 @ 2:46 pm **sooper facepalm with toe loop **

    Sooper faceplam? I’m lost here. At one point Serino started to say My Space and then realized that now it was Facebook that people were using

    Sammy, you really need to control your imagination.

    I will tell you an idea I did have:

    GZ is suspicious of the police, and even afraid that some of them may be in league with the robbers, but does not want to voice that suspicion, perhaps thinking maybe they’ll really go after him if they know that he knows.

    Therefore he does not say that he referred to the “Colts” gang, but says the word was “punks,” which it cannot be, and does not explain his comment on the phone call that went:

    He’s got a button on his shirt.

    I didn’t mishear that. George Zimmerman confirms he said that: (without being asked!)

    https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=1079

    (plays tape 1:03 to 1:16)
    Singleton: Have you moved yet?
    Zimmerman: I don’t think so.
    Singleton: You’re still in front of the clubhouse?
    Zimmerman: I think so.
    Singleton: On Retreat View Circle.
    Zimmerman: Yes, ma’am. I don’t remember even saying he had a button on his shirt.
    Singleton: OK.

    The part that was played at that point was:

    Dispatcher: How old would you say he looks?
    Zimmerman: (continuing) He’s got a button on his shirt.
    Zimmerman: Late teens.
    Dispatcher: Late teens. OK.
    Zimmerman: Uh, huh.
    Zimmerman: Something’s wrong with him. Yup, he’s coming to check me out. He’s got somethin’ in his hands. I don’t know what his deal is. [01:20]

    What is the significance of the button, or what looks like a button to George Zimmerman?

    It must mean something. And the word definitely is button. (or is something else?)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  242. Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t George Zimmerman say:

    1) He stopped the car to make the non-emergency call.

    2) He didn’t move the car, even slowly, during the call.

    3) His car was at a different place than when he started (which was at the clubhouse) about 1 1/2 minutes into the call.

    Of course George Zimmerman is getting rattled and doesn’t explain some things that have perfectly reasonable explanations, but still…

    At 1:39 into the call GZ tells the dispatcher to go past the clubhouse to get to him (and he’s still in his car at that point, because he gets out of it only later after Trayvon Martin started running.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  243. Is George Zimmerman hiding the fact that he was using a cell phone while driving? Is that illegal in Florida?

    http://www.dmvflorida.org/cell-phone-distractions.shtml

    Driving and talking on a cell phone is perfectly legal in Florida.

    And this is one year later, in 2013.

    The Florida DMV advises people not to do so, but it does not say a person will get a ticket or affect his license in any way. It’s just a “bad driving habit.”

    So why would George Zimmerman lie about talking into a cellphone while driving?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  244. https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=1079

    plays tape 1:34 to 1:50)
    Serino: What’s happening now? Are you guys walking now, is he walking?
    Zimmerman: No, that’s, I was parked where I could see him now.
    Serino: So you’re…
    Singleton: OK, so you’re definitely not in front of the clubhouse any more, at this point?
    Zimmerman: No.
    Serino: So you’re ahead of him?
    Zimmerman: No, I was behind him.
    Serino: OK, so you walked to your car, then walked along this path and you were you were behind him?
    Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
    Serino: OK.
    Zimmerman: When I was at the clubhouse he walked…
    Serino: Are you driving slowly or something?
    Zimmerman: No, I pulled over and stopped before I called.
    Serino: OK. OK.
    (plays tape 1:44 to 2:07)

    George Zimmerman is so rattled he;s not making any sense. he just says “yes sir” when Serino says he was out of his car.

    But he didn’t go out of his car at that point, now did he? Possibly at that stage of the investigation the confrontation was supposed to be during the call, but it couldn’t be, or it wouild be heard.

    Georeg Zimmerman says elsewhere, near the start of the tape that Trayvon Martin got to within a car length of the car before he started running, (which is when GZ got out of his car. he says he didn’t run after him. Could be correct – GZ was out of shape)

    This was later. Two minutes and 9 seconds into the call. GZ confirms that that;s when he got out of his car. So till that point GZ must have been in his SUV.

    And it could be at about the time Trayvon Martin started running that he lost his cellphone connection the first time, if the times reported are synchronized.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  245. First Serino interview of Zimmerman February 27, 2012:

    https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=999

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.5427 secs.