Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   AG Eric Holder will give The Martin/Zimmerman case a thorough review, likely with the same level of care and attentiveness that was applied to the "Fast and Furious" program. Nothing like kowtowing to Sharpton in an election year   (news.yahoo.com ) divider line 69
    More: Asinine, Attorney General Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, martin case, fast and furious, National Action Network, Aktiengesellschaft, race war, Black Panthers  
•       •       •

3411 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Apr 2012 at 12:58 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-04-11 12:40:53 PM  
7 votes:
Seriously, admins? You're greening shiatty troll headlines like this now?

Hey, anybody else remember a long time ago when you had to try be both funny and original to expect to get a greenlight on Fark? Now I guess you just need to steal Freeper troll headlines and you're in.
2012-04-11 12:43:11 PM  
5 votes:
I'm confused; you're suggesting that he gave a weak level of attention to F&F and will give the same weak level to Martin's case, though kowtowing to Sharpton implies he'd focus overly much on it, and above all seem to think Obama needs to do something extra to win over the black vote this year. I'm not sure you're saying what you think you're saying.
2012-04-11 12:29:09 PM  
5 votes:
You're right, subby, this is nothing like kowtowing to Sharpton in an election year.
2012-04-11 12:23:46 PM  
4 votes:
i feel like it's worth pointing out that this is a much trollier headline than either free republic's or fox nation's headline for this story.
2012-04-11 01:42:15 PM  
3 votes:
Imagine if the local police had actually done their jobs properly. None of this would be an issue.
2012-04-11 12:40:32 PM  
3 votes:
Tag is for the headline.
2012-04-11 01:01:12 PM  
2 votes:
i still find the "racism" claims curious because objectively speaking it seems like both people involved were the types that either provoke violence or initiate violence

to me at the end of the day this case is no more nationally important than the other thousand shooting deaths that seem to happen everyday, but FOR JUSTICE!
2012-04-11 12:56:00 PM  
2 votes:

DarnoKonrad: Aarontology: Christ, will you people quit your incessant f*cking whining about the threads?

God, you sound like a bunch of teabaggers complaining about the media and how it's not reporting on the FWFW;FW;FW;FW; emails from your racist shutin relatives.

The headline is vile and reeks of gratuitous racism. Sharpton doesn't have a farking thing to do with Eric Holder's job. But hey, they're both Black, amirite?


It's not just this one thread

It's every single f*cking thread. You can't click on anything without it being half the people biatching and moaning and complaining about it. You want them to stop? Stop clicking on them and giving them page and adviews. You keep falling for trolling and then act surprised when it keeps happening.
2012-04-11 12:54:22 PM  
2 votes:

Aarontology: Christ, will you people quit your incessant f*cking whining about the threads?

God, you sound like a bunch of teabaggers complaining about the media and how it's not reporting on the FWFW;FW;FW;FW; emails from your racist shutin relatives.


The headline is vile and reeks of gratuitous racism. Sharpton doesn't have a farking thing to do with Eric Holder's job. But hey, they're both Black, amirite?
2012-04-11 12:38:42 PM  
2 votes:

thomps: i feel like it's worth pointing out that this is a much trollier headline than either free republic's or fox nation's headline for this story.


Well yeah, the mods have to show both sides of the story as if they are equally valid, even if they aren't. CNN would be proud of us.
2012-04-11 12:36:11 PM  
2 votes:

thomps: i feel like it's worth pointing out that this is a much trollier headline than either free republic's or fox nation's headline for this story.


When it comes to inane trolling, Fark does it better.
2012-04-12 02:55:16 PM  
1 vote:
I guess I'll throw my two cents in.

I don't know what happened, and I certainly don't know enough details to form a strong, emotional attachment to this issue.
I'm pretty sure none of us know.

I think an investigation is warranted.
I don't think that the level of derptitude from the Sharptonites was a reasonable response. Mediamongering and taking advantage of under-educated, emotionally malleable masses is a dishonorable way to self promote and make money.

Most importantly, all the fuchnuts on facebook posting hoodie pictures are supreme nozzles of douche. Your "activism" is annoying and ill-informed. Go save Darfur while stopping Kony.
2012-04-11 07:50:23 PM  
1 vote:

The Southern Dandy: First of all, hate crime laws are bullshiat because they make thoughts illegal.


All hate crimes statutes do is codify sentencing enhancements for motives the state finds especially odious. Motive is now and always has been a relevant factor at sentencing. If you kill someone because you actually though unreasonably believe doing so was necessary to protect yourself, you get a much lighter sentence than if you kill someone because someone paid you to. Hate crimes punish for "thoughts" sure. For "thoughts" in conjunction with serious criminal action, just like most criminal statutes.
2012-04-11 05:17:08 PM  
1 vote:

dittybopper: 3. It wasn't his neighborhood. It wasn't even his father's neighborhood. It was the neighborhood of the father's girlfriend.


Who gives a fark if it was "his neighborhood" or not? What the fark does that matter?
2012-04-11 05:15:38 PM  
1 vote:

jafiwam: ongbok: It is funny how if a black person stands up and complains about an injustice they they feel has been done against themselves or other black people they are considered race baiters and racist by some white people. It is like they fully expect for black people to sit down, shut their mouths and take anything that people want to do to them.

Pfft. When they complain about ACTUAL injustice they have a point. They had a point with the Rodney King thing.

They don't have a point with this.

This, is the equivalent to "you didn't let me steal from your store, that's racist!" or "there's no more toilet paper, white man conspiracy!" And the stupid part is, everybody is so afraid of it they give in to that shiate.

Once the word 'racist' is slung around so many times it's directed at all white people regularly every day, they stop caring if they get called it because today is no different than yesterday. It's just noise. Even if some real event comes along, nobody cares anymore. I think we are very near this point already. When the average white person can expect the average black person to call him a racist on a daily basis it loses any meaning, and certainly isn't constructive criticism that needs any bother to fix.

I expect black people to act like rational human beings. That's it. Whether they do that or not is up to them.


Um, there's no proof that Trayvon did anything wrong here. He walked through a neighborhood where the neighborhood busybody thought he didn't belong (IE, because he was black), and then somebody started a fight and Trayvon was shot. We don't know who started the fight. If Zimmermann started the fight, then, um, there farking well was injustice here.
2012-04-11 04:59:52 PM  
1 vote:

Silly Jesus: Innocent until proven guilty. You are putting the burden on the wrong person.


I'm perfectly willing to wait until the facts come out before deciding if Mr. Zimmerman acted correctly or not. Too bad Mr. Martin wasn't given the same courtesy.
2012-04-11 04:19:50 PM  
1 vote:
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Very well thought out post, that's rare for this issue. And to be honest, if Zimmermang had been arrested and charged early on, I'd be satisfied with due process.

LOL - thanks, don't think I've ever been accused of that. Also, if Angela Corey says at her news conference in an hour or so from now that there is not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, or that the weight of all evidence is in his favor, I too will be happy that due process has been served.
2012-04-11 03:59:05 PM  
1 vote:

relcec: sprawl15's troll alt: FTA: Charles Ogletree, a Harvard law professor, said at a panel following Holder's speech that Trayvon Martin is "a symbol of what's wrong" with the criminal justice system.

"I want to see the first black man who uses the 'stand your ground' defense and see if it works. Or the first white victim of the 'stand your ground' by a black defendant and see if it works," Ogletree said.

Liberal Harvard law professors are calling for black people to 'go kill whitey', and somehow it's the GOP that's being racist?

it's got nothing to do with stand your ground as far as teh defense is concerned.

if you believe the victims family zimmerman was the agressor and had no reasonable fear of martin. if you believe what zimmerman says he was pinned to the ground and couldn't retreat even if doing so was reassonable considering the other circumstances.

I really don't see how stand your ground can possibly be relevant, other than liberals are trying to exploit a tragedy to change what they see as an unreasonable law. eventhough stand your ground is what let's martin stop running for his life and punch zimmerman in the face, as everyone should have the right to, if that is in fact what happened.


I think the outrage here is that many people are absolutely positive there would have been an arrest if the dead boy was white. That is the crux of the matter.
2012-04-11 03:45:40 PM  
1 vote:

LasersHurt: It seems pretty clear to me that there's room for deeper analysis in this case. It's better that it goes to trial and has SOME sort of outcome.


I agree. Trial is not required for deeper analysis. Trial is when the deeper analysis is complete. The prosecutor had better farking believe after looking at the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt Zimmerman is guilty or that's some seriously farked up shiat. Duke lacrosse team anyone?

Not bringing it to trial is an outcome.
2012-04-11 03:44:19 PM  
1 vote:

hdhale: culebra: hdhale: Of course the prosecutor will go for the max.

She already decided against this when she refused to send the case to a grand jury. It will be second degree murder at most, but I believe it will be manslaughter. We'll see what she charges him with soon enough.

She ruled nothing out from everything I've read so far, only decided not to go to the grand jury with a case (and there any number of reasons why she would have done that), but indeed we'll find out soon enough.


Because a grand jury would not want to charge him. This way she gets her political victory, the mob gets their man, Obama gets his votes. Heck, why use the current justice system? Have the President just decide innocence or guilt.
2012-04-11 03:34:54 PM  
1 vote:

lennavan: LasersHurt: lennavan: just_intonation: Just read on MSNBC that Zimmerman is now being charged with murder. So, letting the system do its job sometimes works.

Unless of course, there's no reason to charge him with murder whatsoever rather than stupid public outrage. Then the system is completely failing us.

I would hardly say there's "no reason." The kid was killed, and given what little we know so far there is some grey area as to whether or not this falls under Stand your Ground. Ergo, a trial seems like exactly the thing to have to suss out guilt or innocence.

I'm not privy to the facts. I've only read what's in the news and a lot of it is bullshiat. My personal opinion and poutrage is he should be charged with murder for what he did. But I'm always blissfully and most likely ignorantly hopeful that prosecutors have a bit higher standard than me.

I think he deserves a murder charge. If I was a prosecutor, based on the evidence I've read and the law I've interpreted, I'd never bring this to a court. If I was on a jury, I'd easily go not guilty. My best guess - this guy is only being charged to quiet the public outrage. That's probably a pretty shiatty reason to put a guy through the expense and pressures of a trial.


It seems pretty clear to me that there's room for deeper analysis in this case. It's better that it goes to trial and has SOME sort of outcome.
2012-04-11 03:27:50 PM  
1 vote:

omeganuepsilon: Really it's a trap, a self defense mechanism for their (limited)psyche. These people are uncomfortable with this case, can't imagine any case where you wouldn't want the lone survivor to(in their words) "get away", because they've already assumed guilt. Criminal gets put in jail, wraps it up in a nice and neat bow for them.


I can think of plenty of ways that Self-Defense is a very viable reason for killing another person. I have no problem with the notion of "Self-defense" in general. Martin wasn't breaking into Zimmerman's house or anything, he was walking down a public street, he wasn't doing anything illegal, and he wasn't doing anything to Zimmerman. The notion of "defending yourself" against someone who was minding their own business is befuddling to me.

I have a problem with trying to claim "self-defense" when you are involved in a situation that is entirely of your own creation. As some point I think you go from defending yourself to looking for trouble.
2012-04-11 03:16:18 PM  
1 vote:

topcon: LasersHurt: topcon: LasersHurt: Silly Jesus: Fact: You can shoot and kill someone without it being criminal.

You know, I'm not really happy about that.

This case aside: You is crazy. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to shoot someone.

I disagree. I dislike the idea of killing people as a means to any end. You'll note that everything you can legally kill someone for is ALREADY illegal, those people are criminals. That doesn't mean we should be cool with just killing people, especially in these types of situations.

I know sometimes, rarely, it's "necessary." I still think it's wrong. I think if you kill someone, you need to feel like shiat about it, and you need to have your guns held until you pass some sort of evaluation. Shooting someone should be the VERY LAST thing anyone ever thinks of to solve a situation.

I just don't like the idea of killing people. If that makes me crazy, so be it.

Again, completely unrelated to this Trayvon case:

It doesn't make you crazy, you just like to imagine you're living in a sanitized rainbow world. Whether you like it or not, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to kill people, and this is recognized (and frequently done) pretty much everywhere in the world.

This isn't ever going to change. Wake up and join reality. Crazy mentally ill people who want to kill you for money, or rape you, or kidnap your kids will always exist, and it'll always be okay to kill them if it will prevent said things from happening.

Repeat it after me:

This isn't ever going to change.

Some of you are seriously disconnected.


The real issue here is alot of people don't believe in self defense. They don't believe in the personal right to have guns or carry them on the way to the store. If that is their belief than anything else about this case is simply irrelevent. You can't prove them wrong.

Rather than simply admit that and argue from that standpoint they take up the flag of treyvon martin with the pretense that they just want to see the lae enforced. But they really don't care about the law or the facts of the case, which is why they are ignored ao willingly. You can correct them on the facts they'll be back in the next thread posting the same incorrect statements. They don't care, it's only a smokescreen for what they really desire: somebody who carries a gun and uses it for any reason should go to jail. Arguing over who attacked who or the grounds for self defense is inconsequential.

It's why we see these broad sweeping emotional statements: a armed man chased amd shot an unarmed child. Do we care if it self defense? No we do not.

I believe I was the first on the entire internet to recreate the events with all the available evidence to show how it was impossible for Zimmerman to chase Martin after the phone call. Do they care? No, they are in this thread droves posting that, against all evidence, Zimmerman chased and confronted Martin as axiomatic because the truth doesn't matter to them.

They will use this case to argue behind because their real motivation of banning the ownership and use of firearms in America is taken about as seriously as the Nazis posted above are.
2012-04-11 03:15:26 PM  
1 vote:
He didn't have to follow the boy. He was specifically told NOT to follow the boy. Anything after that is on Zimmerman. Much of what happened prior to that is on Zimmerman, too.

Stick up for the senseless death of a teenager by a panicked neighborhood watch hopped up on adrenaline if you want to and pretend like there was no crime committed here.
ADX
2012-04-11 03:11:06 PM  
1 vote:

srhp29: ADX: Bottom line, there are far too many questions and far too many facts in dispute concerning this case; Zimmerman needs to be arrested, charged, tried, and a jury allowed to determine his guilt or innocence.

And if found not gulity, you will be good with it and feel justice was served, right?

I know that is how Americans felt with another recent case in Florida. They were just glad to finally have a conclusion to the Casey Anthony case.

There is really no good end to this that will quiet the noise except a guilty conviction, because those that feel he may not be guilty aren't going to march on Washington if he is found guilty.


If Zimmerman is found not guilty, then so be it. I'm not advocating for his summary execution, all I want is for him to be charged and tried because he shot and killed a teenager under highly questionable circumstances.
2012-04-11 03:10:15 PM  
1 vote:

Silly Jesus: LasersHurt: srhp29: LasersHurt: srhp29: LasersHurt: Silly Jesus:

Maybe some people just want to see a real investigation whenever an unarmed person is killed by an armed person with no (good) witnesses?

How do we know there are no good witnesses? Because the media told us so? They also told us Zimmerman siad "coons". we will know soon enough.

Because every piece of information released has indicated this?

Really? I have read that there was an eye witness that says that Treyvon was on top of Zimmerman beating him. Also, just because the information is not released doesn't mean it does not exist. It might turn out that there is no "good" witness, but you nor I have anyway of knowing that at this point in time.

There was one witness who saw them fighting for a few seconds. He did not see the start of the fight, or the rest of it. He is not a "good" witness for that reason. If you have some reason to believe there's a better witness that has more information, please share, but I suspect you don't. Silly Jesus: Do they usually put their hoodies on sale and write a post about them during the summer?

MOST people who sell hoodies put them on sale when the weather gets warmer, yes. P.S. March/April is not summer.

If there is no witness and Zimmerman states that he didn't start it and Martin is dead then where do you propose getting the evidence to charge him and go to trial? Sometimes the circumstances just suck and we may never be sure what happened, but Zimmerman, like it or not, has enough going for his claim of self defense that he isn't going to be charged with anything.



Angle of entry from the bullet that killed Martin would indicate quite a few things regarding this. As would any stippling on Martin's clothing/body. Photos of the scene would indicate a bit as well (it was raining and odds are the footprints were rather visible, which would indicate position, and help lay a framework of the "stalking vs. following" argument, or even if Martin doubled back and surprised Zimmerman). Photos of Zimmerman and Martin would also indicate the nature of the assault that they were in. One of the interesting things that caused an uproar was that Martin's hands had no scratches on them and therefore he couldn't have assaulted Zimmerman (which is not necessarily true). On the flip side, I didn't hear anything about bruising to his ribs, forearms, neck, kidneys, etc., which would indicate defensive wounds or signs that he was physically assaulted by Zimmerman prior to the shooting. That said, the same can be said for Zimmerman. Without that evidence it's impossible to do more than speculate.

That's also not including any additional evidence that might have been collected (for all we know, someone's nannycam might have captured some of it). Surprisingly, the evidence collected in a crime like this is usually the only way to truthfully understand just what happened. I just hope the Sanford PD weren't morons at the scene in collecting it.
2012-04-11 03:07:22 PM  
1 vote:
Guilty or innocent, the country has really lost something today.

Now the judicial system is run by the sway of public opinion and the personal feelings of the President. This is just bad.
2012-04-11 03:00:18 PM  
1 vote:

The Homer Tax: omeganuepsilon: How should it be re-written?

What could be more fair?

I'm not a lawyer, but from what I can gather about this, the way the law is written in several states, even similar "stand your ground" laws it better avoids situations like this. The way the Florida Law is written, from what I can gather, seems especially poor.

I think that if you're following someone around, especially someone who isn't actually committing any crimes, and then you initiate a confrontation with them, you forfeit your claims to "self defense." If you were worried about your safety, you should have gone home (as encouraged by the 911 dispatcher you already called to report the suspicious person).


At common law, your justification by self defense was completely negated by any little thing you did wrong (including being the "initiator"). The drafters of the model penal code saw this was absurd and most states have followed suit. In most places (including Florida), being the initial aggressor means that if a fight you started begins to get out of hand, you have a duty to attempt a retreat before using deadly force. That's what would apply here and even if Zimmerman started the fight, he would still be justified in killing Martin if he were reasonably in fear that Martin was going to kill him and he had no way of getting away. This has nothing to do with "Stand Your Ground" and has developed within the criminal law long before it came on the scene.
2012-04-11 03:00:13 PM  
1 vote:

LasersHurt: topcon: LasersHurt: Silly Jesus: Fact: You can shoot and kill someone without it being criminal.

You know, I'm not really happy about that.

This case aside: You is crazy. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to shoot someone.

I disagree. I dislike the idea of killing people as a means to any end. You'll note that everything you can legally kill someone for is ALREADY illegal, those people are criminals. That doesn't mean we should be cool with just killing people, especially in these types of situations.

I know sometimes, rarely, it's "necessary." I still think it's wrong. I think if you kill someone, you need to feel like shiat about it, and you need to have your guns held until you pass some sort of evaluation. Shooting someone should be the VERY LAST thing anyone ever thinks of to solve a situation.

I just don't like the idea of killing people. If that makes me crazy, so be it.


Again, completely unrelated to this Trayvon case:

It doesn't make you crazy, you just like to imagine you're living in a sanitized rainbow world. Whether you like it or not, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to kill people, and this is recognized (and frequently done) pretty much everywhere in the world.

This isn't ever going to change. Wake up and join reality. Crazy mentally ill people who want to kill you for money, or rape you, or kidnap your kids will always exist, and it'll always be okay to kill them if it will prevent said things from happening.

Repeat it after me:

This isn't ever going to change.

Some of you are seriously disconnected.
2012-04-11 02:50:13 PM  
1 vote:

LasersHurt: Silly Jesus: Fact: You can shoot and kill someone without it being criminal.

You know, I'm not really happy about that.


No, I understand the self-defense rule. I really do. I just need there to be proof of it, other than a simple statement by the shooter.

And this situation didn't exist in a vacuum, either. It's not like two guys crossed paths in an alley, Person A tried mugging Person B, started cutting him with a knife, and Person B shot Person A to defend himself. That situation has no information surrounding it to lead in one direction or another. In THIS situation, Zimmerman is on tape calling Trayvon "suspicious", saying "these a**holes always get away", following him around, then getting out of his car and chasing him, after being told not to. That shows Zimmerman being the aggressor. In order to believe his claim of self-defense, there should be proof. WHERE IS IT? That is all people are asking, and people like SJ just keep dancing around that central point. If there is evidence, how come we aren't aware of it? If there isn't evidence, why wasn't he charged? It's not that complicated.
2012-04-11 02:44:19 PM  
1 vote:

The Homer Tax: I don't understand why Martin had a duty to flee, but Zimmerman didn't?


And let's not forget that Martin did actually flee, and Zimmerman chased him and forced the confrontation.
2012-04-11 02:43:19 PM  
1 vote:

Car_Ramrod: jafiwam: The Homer Tax: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: How do we know the gf is being truthful? As far as I can tell, its her word against Zinmermang.

Has she changed her story at all, like he did?

I think if an armed stranger is following me around the neighborhood at night and exits his car to approach me, I have a reasonable fear that my life is in danger. Do you not agree with this statement?

I'm really trying to picture a situation here where Zimmerman is not the agressor. He even states on the 911 call that Martin is fleeing from him, and told that continuing to pursue him "wouldn't be necessary."

Sigh.

There is no indication that Martin knew Zimmerman was armed until after the struggle occurred. Definitely not until they spoke. Otherwise Martin would have mentioned a GUN to his GF don't you think? Or better yet, just run?

You are equating "following someone" as "aggressor". IF that is true, I aggressed about 15 people on the way to work, one of which was a police officer!!! OMG!

If you chased someone that was running away from you on your way to work this morning, you're pretty messed up.


I love how everyone defending Zimmerman hasn't ONCE tried to see this from Trayvon Maritn's side. A strange man he's never seen before is chasing him, even after trying to literally run away. Why SHOULDN'T Trayvon Martin punch him in the face? Clearly Trayvon did everything in his power to avoid an altercation, but Zimmerman just wouldn't drop it.
2012-04-11 02:28:21 PM  
1 vote:
To me it doesn't matter whether Zimmerman is legally free of guilt or not. The facts are:

1. Zimmerman was armed and Martin was not.
2. Zimmerman confronted Martin.
3. This confrontation resulted in Martin's death.

He knowingly brought a weapon to a confrontation he initiated, and used the weapon to kill an unarmed person. In my mind, Zimmerman bears moral culpability for Martin's death. The particulars are irrelevant.

I hope Martin's family finds some solace in the fact that Zimmerman's life is basically ruined regardless of his legal status.
2012-04-11 02:25:40 PM  
1 vote:

BigBooper: patrick767: Thanks for a shiatty, unfunny headline, Fark trollministrators.

Degenz: DarnoKonrad: Tag is for the headline.

Done in six.

They've run out of all the good Martin/Zimmerman headlines, so they have to go to the backups. It's what happens when Fark has more that twenty threads on a single issue.


I honestly don't understand why people are so vehemently against letting a jury sort all this out. The fact that Zimmerman pursued Martin with a gun is, to me, enough to remove his self-defense claim under the Florida statute. Then you add in all the other stuff like him shooting Martin while he was on top of Zimmerman but miraculously has no blood spatter on him, got treated by EMTs within a few moments of the incident and they managed to stop what should be profuse bleeding with no bandages is all just over the top. You can argue there are reasonable explanation for all this but isn't that what trials are for?

I think the original State's Attorney badly flubbed the investigation for whatever reason. If this special prosecutor, Angela Corey, says there's not enough evidence then I'm willing to believe here and let all this go.

But I still think the law should be changed.
2012-04-11 02:22:10 PM  
1 vote:

The Homer Tax: Mike Chewbacca: So far, and as far as I know, only the girlfriend who heard the two meet up and exchange words. She said she heard a scuffle start, and the phone headset seems to have been knocked off Trayvon's head, but she couldn't tell who started it.

culebra: Apparently not. The girlfriend is the closest thing I've heard of.

Then why do people keep stating otherwise?

srhp29: How do we know there are no good witnesses?

Would you say "we don't know of any good witnesses to the actual confrontation" is an accurate statement? Because from what I can gather it seems like there are a lot of people in this thread who are acting like there are a bunch of credible witnesses who actually saw the confrontation.


Well, we know that George Zimmerman's statement of "I got jumped by Trayvon Martin from behind when I was at my truck" is a lie. Because the girlfriend stated that words were exchanged before the physical confrontation started. And seeing as how George Zimmerman is caught in one lie, it puts the rest of what he's said in doubt. We don't have an eye-witness, we do have an ear-witness, and she tells a very different story from the one George Zimmerman had to revise.
2012-04-11 02:15:31 PM  
1 vote:

timujin: Congratulations.


According to WaPost:

Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey plans to announce as early as Wednesday afternoon that she is charging neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, according to a law enforcement official close to the investigation.

It was not immediately clear what charge Zimmerman will face.


I think you may be surprised to hear me say: GOOD. They did an investigation. They feel they have enough evidence to try him. Zimmerman will have his day in court. I have no problem with this at all. A jury will decide this case after seeing all the evidence.
2012-04-11 02:14:59 PM  
1 vote:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: This. I think its a good law except for the initial aggressor clause. That's why to me, if Zimmermang is shown to have started the physical attack, I hope he's charged, regardless of whether or not Martin got the upper hand. Based on what we know so far, it doesn't look like that's what happened though.


By getting out of his car and chasing him Zimmerman committed simple assault -why do you think Martin tried to ditch him, he was apprehensive about being followed buy some strange guy- this would make Zimmerman the aggressor. People seem to ignore the fact that Zimmerman did not have a legally defensible reason for leaving his vehicle to pursue Martin. Martins only offense was to be a person unknown to Zimmerman, who in Zimmerman's opinion was acting "suspicious." If Zimmemran had used been reasonable and not decided to play community hero this would not have happend.
2012-04-11 02:14:41 PM  
1 vote:

Silly Jesus: So he's guilty of doing something that isn't criminal? (self-defense)


That's begging the question. You're assuming his statement of self-defense is true, and when asked for evidence, you state that it was self-defense.

Evidently the police believed that he shot him in self defense, and so did the original prosecutor. Look at any of these threads for the self defense evidence that has been laid out time and time again.

Look at any of these threads, or any of the news items, and you'll realize that's what people are pissed about. They just believed him with no evidence other than his statement. That's bullshiat. If there is evidence of this self-defense, and it's enough to not warrant a trial, we should be privy to it.

In America we don't hold trials for people without probably cause. The people whose job it is to establish probable cause on a daily basis determined that there was none. We don't hold trials in this country just to see if someone should be charged, we establish probable cause, issue the charge, and then a jury gets to look it over in a trial. You are wanting to skip the most important steps that protect citizens from being brought to trial every time a mob requests it.

The "mob" is asking for a real examination of this case, and for evidence it was self-defense. The most important step is determining a justifiable cause for KILLING Trayvon Martin. This determination has been glossed over with a "because we say so", and it's bullshiat. You are repeatedly missing the point, and based upon your lovely Obama/Holder photoshop, I can't believe it's anything less than purposeful.
2012-04-11 02:14:18 PM  
1 vote:

LasersHurt: Silly Jesus:

Maybe some people just want to see a real investigation whenever an unarmed person is killed by an armed person with no (good) witnesses?


Yeah this. if the case fails in court or after a THOROUGH investigation due to the self defense angle fine, but right now we have someone dead, someone else admitting to shooting him, and folks taking the story of the shooter as gospel. (The witness did not state he saw who started the fight, that is important, Trayvon starting the fight also conflicts wiht the girlfriends account of the conversation on the telephone).
2012-04-11 02:11:49 PM  
1 vote:

karnal: ongbok

ham-operator: I'm going to put a bounty on Al Sharpton's head like the blacks did on George. I woud be in prison within hours. If the Blacks want to create their own laws two can play that game. I would not be in Sanford on the 23rd if I was a Black Panther.

The "blacks" didn't do anything. A small group of black people said something stupid. And no you wouldn't be in jail in hours. White supremacist groups have been calling for Sharpton's head for years and nobody has been arrested.

BS - show me the clip where someone called for Sharpton's head. I bet you can't. The Black Panthers were the one that issued the bounty - not a small group by any means. They are inciting a riot - plain and simple.


In the 80's there were many times that white supremacist called for Sharpton's head. And if you think that black people listen to the New Black Panther party you are an idiot. That would be like me saying that all white people take their marching orders from the Klan. Hell most black people didn't even know that the New Black Panther party existed until they popped up here.

Another thing I have to ask you is why are people like you praying for riots to break out. In every thread on this subject you all start making racist post and bringing up race riots like you are really hopping they break out.
2012-04-11 02:11:06 PM  
1 vote:

Azlefty: jafiwam: The aggressor was Trayvon. He threw the first blow

Actually due to Zimmy chasing him it can be reasonably argued that Zimmerman had actually committed assault and that Martin was defending himself when he struck his pursuer. First blow means nothing , you come at me in a manner that makes me feel apprehensive or fearful of you harming me then any reasonable action I take is self defense -such as cleaning your clock to remove your threat. In other words due to Zimmerman's actions Martin was Standing his ground.

Who swung first means a lot less than what lead up to the swing


I don't know what I'd do if a guy was chasing/following me all over my neighborhood, even finding me after I ran (Trayvon did at one point run, based on Zimmerman's 911 call) away. I might assume that my life is in danger and try to beat the guy down before he had a chance to kill me. Of course, the cops and the 911 dispatchers know that's what could happen, which is why they told Zimmerman to not follow Trayvon Martin.
2012-04-11 02:10:16 PM  
1 vote:

just_intonation: No evidence of what? The fact that blacks are making this case about race? My narrative is that Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not the court of public opinion, and that the cri ...


THIS. This racist shiat right here. "The blacks" aren't doing this. People from every race are involved here.
2012-04-11 02:07:20 PM  
1 vote:
Silly Jesus:

Maybe some people just want to see a real investigation whenever an unarmed person is killed by an armed person with no (good) witnesses?
2012-04-11 02:04:10 PM  
1 vote:

jafiwam: The aggressor was Trayvon. He threw the first blow.


According to whom: The alive man who is claiming it was self-defense?

That said, how would you react to an armed stranger who was following you around a neighborhood at night? I imagine I would act violently as well. Why did Martin not also enjoy the right to self-defense?
2012-04-11 02:00:41 PM  
1 vote:

jafiwam: I expect black people to act like rational human beings. That's it. Whether they do that or not is up to them.


Why you you expect "black people" to act as a uniform group?

I am serious here. I don't know how someone can claim that literally an entire race of people acts and operates as a uniform group, some sort of hive-mind like the Borg, and then *also* get upset when they are accurately labeled as a racist.

This has nothing to do with this case, you just sparked my interest in this sub-thread. Without adding any value judgements, you understand that you are, or at least what you said, is racist, right?
2012-04-11 01:57:04 PM  
1 vote:

dittybopper: LasersHurt: dittybopper: LasersHurt: There has been an ongoing "black people are to blame for this because they are race baiting and they're the real racists anyway" thing that has been really gross lately.

Al Sharpton is involved. You can assume that race baiting is happening based solely upon that fact.

Or is it race baiting to claim it's race baiting just because Sharpton's involved? Reverse-race-baiting as a method of hurting the credibility of the event.

You are seriously arguing that Sharpton has credibility on this issue? Does the name Tawana Brawley ring any bells? How about Crystal Mangum?


"Many conservatives have responded to decades of (perceived and actual) race hucksterism from the Left by essentially insisting that black people in America today have no special, valid policy concerns. They look at Trayvon Martin and all they can see is Tawana Brawley."

"Similarly, a lot of conservatives get put on tilt by Al Sharpton-why does he get away with so much?-but the fact is that Sharpton is far less influential than he once was. Aside from the fact that "Al Sharpton Did It Too" isn't an excuse for anything, it's a huge error to look at the Martin case and see Sharpton or figures like him as the prime movers behind the public reaction.."

Link (new window)
2012-04-11 01:57:03 PM  
1 vote:

mycatisposter: LasersHurt: DozeNutz: Aarontology: Why are the feds getting involved?

Its election year, and gotta race bait to divide and conquer.

Yes, that's the ONLY reason that a high-profile case might get reviewed. You idiot.

Considering the lack of evidence against Zimmerman, election year politics is a fair conclusion.


You do realize that there's a lack of evidence because the cops failed to investigate properly, right?
2012-04-11 01:53:11 PM  
1 vote:

dittybopper: LasersHurt: dittybopper: LasersHurt: There has been an ongoing "black people are to blame for this because they are race baiting and they're the real racists anyway" thing that has been really gross lately.

Al Sharpton is involved. You can assume that race baiting is happening based solely upon that fact.

Or is it race baiting to claim it's race baiting just because Sharpton's involved? Reverse-race-baiting as a method of hurting the credibility of the event.

You are seriously arguing that Sharpton has credibility on this issue? Does the name Tawana Brawley ring any bells? How about Crystal Mangum?


The only people who give a shiat about Al Sharpton are the idiots on the right who think the people on the left worship him like a god. We don't. He's a racist anti-semite and a dick. Nobody cares about that asshole.

For the record, I heard about this case weeks before Al Sharpton attention-whored himself into this mess.
2012-04-11 01:46:48 PM  
1 vote:

culebra: Imagine if the local police had actually done their jobs properly. None of this would be an issue.


That's a huge part of the outrage. Because no real investigation was done, we'll likely never know what really happened, and we'll never know if George Zimmerman had every right to shoot Trayvon Martin. I'm okay if George Zimmerman "gets away" with this if Trayvon Martin truly did threaten his life. But we'll never know.
2012-04-11 01:39:01 PM  
1 vote:

ChuDogg: Car_Ramrod: I read about this case weeks before Sharpton was involved and I was shocked that a man could just shoot someone, claim it was self defense on the spot, and not even get put to trial. If you think Sharpton is the reason people are interested in this case, you are horribly mistaken.

I'm amazed people claim to know what happened and can determine guilt when the investigstion is sealed from the public.


What did I type that is in question?

Silly Jesus: Evidence is needed for a trial. Things that seem like crimes don't go to trial all the time due to a lack of evidence. There also needs to be evidence for a charge. There was evidently no, or inadequate, evidence that this was not a case of self-defense, therefore no crime and no charge and no trial. Every accusation doesn't get resolved with a trial. There are several steps in place to determine the legitimacy of a claim or determine if a crime was actually committed BEFORE a trial even enters into the picture.


I think the evidence is that he admitted he shot someone. I think that something more than the shooter's word is required to prove self-defense. I don't think "self-defense" should be the default setting for any murder investigation. Why should we automatically trust someone who just shot someone else? Can I go around shooting people, say it was self-defense, and the police have to believe me?
2012-04-11 01:38:34 PM  
1 vote:

LasersHurt: There has been an ongoing "black people are to blame for this because they are race baiting and they're the real racists anyway" thing that has been really gross lately.


It is funny how if a black person stands up and complains about an injustice they they feel has been done against themselves or other black people they are considered race baiters and racist by some white people. It is like they fully expect for black people to sit down, shut their mouths and take anything that people want to do to them.

topcon: LasersHurt: srhp29: http://www.katu.com/news/local/Police-narrowing-investigation-on-braz e n-teen-mob-146915185.html

"Any one of these could be my child"

-Barack Obama

I voted for him but he really shoudl stay out of this, as should the Federal government. The States were meant to govern themselves. The Feds are out of control and need to be collared.

What does that link have to do with anything? And Obama HAS stayed out of this. He made one sympathetic comment and moved on.

And he probably regretted the "Trayvon could be my son" remark as it was a few days before we found out he was kicked out of school multiple times, talks about drugs on Twitter, and refers to himself as "NO_LIMIT_N&%$!"

I'm sure it made more sense during that first week or two we only saw pictures of him as a twelve year old holding a baby, instead of the one with his gold grill in.


Wow the kid acted like a typical teenager by being suspended from school, experimenting with weed and quoting song lyrics. If you are going to use that as a reason why he should have been killed then you are going to have to kill the majority of teens in this country.

And that whole gold grill thing is just stupid, because that looked like one of those $5 costume grills people buy as jokes, but of course he was black so it is another reason why he is evil.
2012-04-11 01:31:46 PM  
1 vote:

srhp29: Then you pull out the "What about ANY TIME EVER that a crime happened to a white person? HUH? DOUBLE STANDARDS!" Which, too, is incredibly ignorant and stupid.

So you think that if the kid was white, this would be in the news like it is then? I will have to agree to disagree, and I am not a racist. I have no issue with anyone of any other race. I am just tired of the media driving a racial divide in this country with its careless, dishonest methods of reporting.


Who knows. What I do know is that there are a lot of people who are VERY sure that the libs and the blacks are making up racism to gain political points, and I think it happens because they're projecting their own "by any means necessary, our team must win" mentality onto everyone else. It comes off as denial that racism exists or could cause things like this to happen, and it's wrong.
2012-04-11 01:30:05 PM  
1 vote:

Tatsuma: AG Eric Holder?

Is that the same AG Eric Holder who said there was 'no need for ID voting laws' then a video surfaced of a white young man pretending to be him and voting in his place during the primaries?


LOL YOU GOT TAKEN BY AN O'QUEEF PIECE

Damn you are dumb.
2012-04-11 01:29:44 PM  
1 vote:

topcon: LasersHurt: srhp29: http://www.katu.com/news/local/Police-narrowing-investigation-on-braz e n-teen-mob-146915185.html

"Any one of these could be my child"

-Barack Obama

I voted for him but he really shoudl stay out of this, as should the Federal government. The States were meant to govern themselves. The Feds are out of control and need to be collared.

What does that link have to do with anything? And Obama HAS stayed out of this. He made one sympathetic comment and moved on.

And he probably regretted the "Trayvon could be my son" remark as it was a few days before we found out he was kicked out of school multiple times, talks about drugs on Twitter, and refers to himself as "NO_LIMIT_N&%$!"

I'm sure it made more sense during that first week or two we only saw pictures of him as a twelve year old holding a baby, instead of the one with his gold grill in.


He said "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon". Why can't people get the basic facts right?

Also, are you sure you're looking at the pictures of the real Trayvon Martin, or all the other Trayvon Martins that people were using to smear the name of the victim?
2012-04-11 01:22:19 PM  
1 vote:

Overfiend: DarnoKonrad: Aarontology: Christ, will you people quit your incessant f*cking whining about the threads?

God, you sound like a bunch of teabaggers complaining about the media and how it's not reporting on the FWFW;FW;FW;FW; emails from your racist shutin relatives.

The headline is vile and reeks of gratuitous racism. Sharpton doesn't have a farking thing to do with Eric Holder's job. But hey, they're both Black, amirite?

Who does Mr. Holder work for (besides "us")? Sharpton, like Tea party zealots on the other side, can push politicans into dealing with issues they maybe would not get into.

Is it really that hard to make that connection?

Not everything is racist, even if you think it.


"It's a huge error to look at the Martin case and see Sharpton or figures like him as the prime movers behind the public reaction."

I read about this case weeks before Sharpton was involved and I was shocked that a man could just shoot someone, claim it was self defense on the spot, and not even get put to trial. If you think Sharpton is the reason people are interested in this case, you are horribly mistaken.
2012-04-11 01:16:35 PM  
1 vote:

topcon: "How can our nation risk losing so many of tomorrows leaders, teachers, artists, scientists, attorneys and pastors? The answer, of course, is that we cant."

Oh, man. Trayvon could have been mere years away from curing cancer. Even discounting the fact he couldn't spell and spent a lot of time out of school, maybe he was secretly some microbiological genius.

Or not.


You're right. The dude deserved to be executed.
2012-04-11 01:14:42 PM  
1 vote:

MasterChief-M4: Hopefully they investigate this with the same level of professionalism they put into the Black Panthers voter intimidation.

Oh wait...


Or the New Black Panters bounty on Zimmerman's head. Have there been arrests made in that matter as of yet?
2012-04-11 01:11:02 PM  
1 vote:
"How can our nation risk losing so many of tomorrows leaders, teachers, artists, scientists, attorneys and pastors? The answer, of course, is that we cant."

Oh, man. Trayvon could have been mere years away from curing cancer. Even discounting the fact he couldn't spell and spent a lot of time out of school, maybe he was secretly some microbiological genius.

Or not.
2012-04-11 01:08:57 PM  
1 vote:
FTA: Charles Ogletree, a Harvard law professor, said at a panel following Holder's speech that Trayvon Martin is "a symbol of what's wrong" with the criminal justice system.

"I want to see the first black man who uses the 'stand your ground' defense and see if it works. Or the first white victim of the 'stand your ground' by a black defendant and see if it works," Ogletree said.


Liberal Harvard law professors are calling for black people to 'go kill whitey', and somehow it's the GOP that's being racist?
2012-04-11 01:08:45 PM  
1 vote:
It's not news, it's low brow race trolling.
2012-04-11 01:08:32 PM  
1 vote:
Congress comes back in session next Monday. I predict calls for House and Senate hearings and investigations that farking day. And the odds of those hearings and investigations happening in the Senate are nearly 100% if the special prosecutor does not press charges. This has grown so much beyond the actual event that it long ago surpassed the ridiculous.
2012-04-11 01:04:35 PM  
1 vote:

AdamK: i still find the "racism" claims curious because objectively speaking it seems like both people involved were the types that either provoke violence or initiate violence

to me at the end of the day this case is no more nationally important than the other thousand shooting deaths that seem to happen everyday, but FOR JUSTICE!


"But people are murdered anonymously all the time!" is a stupid argument.
2012-04-11 01:03:55 PM  
1 vote:
"The attorney general made the comments in an appearance before a civil rights organization founded by the Rev. Al Sharpton."

Well, that's your first mistake, Senor Holder
2012-04-11 01:03:34 PM  
1 vote:
From what I've heard about the special prosecutor, Zimmerman's goose is pretty cooked. Especially since he pissed off his lawyers and they quit.
2012-04-11 01:02:27 PM  
1 vote:

Silly Jesus: "If we find evidence of a potential federal criminal civil rights crime, we will take appropriate action," said the attorney general.

I guess this doesn't apply to voter intimidation.

Oh, what's that you say?, Zimmerman is "white?" Gotcha.


I'm sorry you find black people intimidating.
2012-04-11 01:00:28 PM  
1 vote:
Feds prepping for the inevitable butthurt from the prosecuter's annoucement to not press charges.
2012-04-11 12:53:49 PM  
1 vote:

SlothB77: I said it at the end of the other thread, but I'll say it again here.

Martin/ Zimmerman-related race riots now = Romney win in November. No need to alienate the voters you don't have locked up to kowtow to the voters you already do have locked up.


Race riots will cause the redneck voters to have 2 votes each instead of 1? Exactly how does anger over black rioters translate to more votes for the etch-o-sketch mormon?
2012-04-11 12:43:09 PM  
1 vote:

Cyberluddite: Seriously, admins? You're greening shiatty troll headlines like this now?

Hey, anybody else remember a long time ago when you had to try be both funny and original to expect to get a greenlight on Fark? Now I guess you just need to steal Freeper troll headlines and you're in.



Oh they're laughing.
2012-04-11 12:25:59 PM  
1 vote:
Why are the feds getting involved?
 
Displayed 69 of 69 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report