[scaredyclassic]

Juries never find any particular truth.

The only question they answer is whether doubt exists and whether the doubt is reasonable.

Jury might think Zimmerman attacked Martin, but have some doubt, and acquit.

It is only ever about doubts, uncertainties and reasonable possibilities….

[scaredyclassic]

“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one”

why do black males commit crimes at higher rates?

according to the national geographic this month, racism may come ultimately from our love of sugar…

[scaredyclassic]

Where you stand depends on where you sit.

Which truth is most useful? Which most just?

Which seems most to accord with what I think I perceive around me today.

Which truth makes me feel better?

Which truth justifies me?

Which facts shall I marshal and which shall I ignore.

[scaredyclassic]

more than one perspective can be correct. there can be truth in everyone’s position.

facts are fluid.

[scaredyclassic]

the jury speaks to the Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/in-our-defense-these-were-some-pretty-fuckedup-law,33126/

[scaredyclassic]

if you can stand your ground to shoot someone, cant you stand your ground to punch them?

perhaps its time to get some rules for neighborhood watch groups. like, maybe they should just “watch” and call the cops, and not follow people around with guns.

if a stranger confronts you on the street in an angry or accusatory manner, it’s probably often best to run like hell or hit them as hard as you can first.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=ctr70]First of all, the liberal media handling of this was a total disgrace assuming guilt before GZ had his trail & whipping up all this emotion. Also, Obama’s comment that if he had a son he would look like TM alluded to a assumption of GZ guilt before he had his trial and all the facts came in. Talk about jumping to conclusions, and this is the president of the U.S.! Way to be a leader and divide the country Barack!

The justice system in America works on EVIDENCE not EMOTION and SPECULATION. All this knee jerk liberal horseshit that “if TM was white it wouldn’t have happened” or this or that…is all BS speculation. There is NO evidence to support any of that crap. All that matters in the end is if the jury thought GZ acted in self-defense. That is IT. That is ALL that matters. None of this conjecture garbage about racial profiling this or that. The jury members sat in that courtroom through every bit of that trial, the prosecution helped pick them, and they thought long and hard and made a decision BASED ON THE EVIDENCE. End of story.[/quote]

On the one hand you’re right. Guilt or innocence are really meaningless without a verdict. The verdict alone matters.

On the other hand, there’s got to be more to the discussion. If my kid were writing a report on to kill a mockingbird, and he wrote jury found him guilty end of story, I might send it back for a rewrite.

[scaredyclassic]

[ quote=Blogstar]Scaredy, when did Zimmerman corner Trayvon and start screaming at him for explanations? Who was a witness to that? Where was it recorded. It wasn’t and it isn’t even a likely scenario. It’s not a comparison at all.[/quote]

Ok then. Just a black male adult coming up into the face if a white teen. White teen justified in feeling threatened in a bad drug infested neighborhood when questioned what he’s doing here?

[scaredyclassic]

I concur with Barkley. Maybe he should be ambassador to north Korea.

[scaredyclassic]

I’m not judging your mothers intuition when used in your life. Not at all.

I am judging the use of such intuition when deciding facts at trial.

To say one is being fair is at the very least to acknowledge the potential for bias in having such intuitions creep into ones judgment.

We all come with preconceptions. It is so difficult to start with a clean slate.

Guns, fear, prejudice, intuition, testosterone, protecting turf and especially HOAs — a toxic combo!

[scaredyclassic]

I don’t … I just don’t think we should pretend that we judge people on trial solely on “facts” and not on the thousands of feelings, hunches and statistical intuitions we impart to a situation.

I’m not saying the Zimmerman jury got it wrong. I don’t know the Florida laws. It sounds like they were pretty good about following the letter if the law and if so I commend them for it.

However, what makes the jury sometimes want to be punctilious about the law and sometimes not may be matters unrelated to pure fact, if there even is such a thing…

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=jstoesz]Scardey, I think you are falling for the “all else equal” fallacy.

If all else between the two men is identical but the color of their skin. Meaning they have the same clothing, mannerisms, facial expressions, etc. I doubt many would judge the runners differently.

Now the questions is are some of those other characteristics fair to judge on. Seems to me, sometimes yes, sometimes no. Hows that for muddying the waters.[/quote]

I’m willing to bet the vast majority of people, and cops, are going to say it is statistically more likely that the black guy is running as fast as he can for a bad reason than the white guy and therefore more reasonable to stop him, all other factors being identical and that the white guys trying to get to his max heart rate.

[scaredyclassic]

Eric holder, black, got stopped while running; probably looked as joggerly as your avg white dude who is so unlikely to get stopped running.

[scaredyclassic]

A black man running down the street as fast as he can in a white neighborhood.

A white man running down the street as fast as he can in a black neighborhood.

Do you think it likely they’re running for the same reason?

[scaredyclassic]

There’s facts…

There’s feelings…

And there’s no clear line between them…

[Author]

Posts