Just another day in America.

[THEWULFMAN]

I love what Duel of Fates and Dad had to say. Very nice opinions.

If a gay guy gets beat to death, why should his murderer get a worse sentencing than a guy who beats a straight guy to death? It's discriminating, and I hate it.

Somewhat random, but why the hell is this topic called Just another day in America? DoF, I usually love your opinions but why did you pick that title? Are you trying to imply stuff like this only happens here in America? Because I assure you, there are plenty of murders in other countries.

Martin Luther King [Jr.] died in vain, that is all.

You, are an [derriere orifice]. Also, you're referring to Junior, not his dad. You're either lazy or a simpleton (you pick). That is all.

[Col. Hstar]

Somewhat random, but why the hell is this topic called Just another day in America? DoF, I usually love your opinions but why did you pick that title? Are you trying to imply stuff like this only happens here in America? Because I assure you, there are plenty of murders in other countries.

I'm pretty sure it had to do with the fact that, this is how the media here pretty much responds to these stories. (A media that is supposed to be free of any government, and corporate influence )

I really doubt anyone thinks it happens here only. It was just a title. I've been known to be wrong though

[THEWULFMAN]

I'm pretty sure it had to do with the fact that, this is how the media here pretty much responds to these stories. (A media that is supposed to be free of any government, and corporate influence )

I really doubt anyone thinks it happens here only. It was just a title. I've been known to be wrong though

Don't get me wrong, I freaking hate the media here in the US. I just didn't think it was an appropriate title. See, this is why I don't get along with people well. I have very loud and annoying opinions.

[ProfessorDreadNaught]

Pepsi, your review of the information at hand is wrong in nearly every way. First, Mr. Zimmerman was indeed taken into immediate custody. In handcuffs, in the back of a squad car while cooperating fully with police and investigators. He surrendered his firearm and all his clothes and possessions he had on him at the time of the incident to the authorities who detained him for questioning. It was only after being photographed, fingerprinted, interrogated and incarcerated for several hours that he was released with the admonition not to leave town and that investigators would expect to be able to reach him and have further questions for him in the immediate future. That his cooperation with these investigators would be required and possibly compelled. Police followed proper procedure. That was NOT what the outcry was over.

An armed man shot an unarmed teenager. That is what the outcry is about. That is the core of the feelings of injustice. That the police looked beyond that solitary fact and released the gunman is at the core of the outcry against the police. Those crying racism feel that the reason that fact is overlooked is because the deadman is black.

Your information regarding the acts of Mr. Zimmerman that evening are grossly prejudicial and inaccurate. Mr. Zimmerman, according to his own account corroborated by eye witness accounts, was indeed being beaten by Master Trayvon and did receive multiple lacerations and contusions from their altercation. Expert voice analysis cannot determine the voices recorded from the various audio sources available.

Finally, the most ridiculous statement "Even if Trayvon attacked George Zimmerman, would you not? You are a 17 year-old kid, alone at 23:00, and you notice someone following you... How would you feel?"

A 17 year old kid caught by an adult on other peoples property, cutting through yards at nearly midnight should NEVER contemplate throwing a punch.

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

Pepsi, your review of the information at hand is wrong in nearly every way. First, Mr. Zimmerman was indeed taken into immediate custody. In handcuffs, in the back of a squad car while cooperating fully with police and investigators. He surrendered his firearm and all his clothes and possessions he had on him at the time of the incident to the authorities who detained him for questioning. It was only after being photographed, fingerprinted, interrogated and incarcerated for several hours that he was released with the admonition not to leave town and that investigators would expect to be able to reach him and have further questions for him in the immediate future. That his cooperation with these investigators would be required and possibly compelled. Police followed proper procedure. That was NOT what the outcry was over.

An armed man shot an unarmed teenager. That is what the outcry is about. That is the core of the feelings of injustice. That the police looked beyond that solitary fact and released the gunman is at the core of the outcry against the police. Those crying racism feel that the reason that fact is overlooked is because the deadman is black.

Your information regarding the acts of Mr. Zimmerman that evening are grossly prejudicial and inaccurate. Mr. Zimmerman, according to his own account corroborated by eye witness accounts, was indeed being beaten by Master Trayvon and did receive multiple lacerations and contusions from their altercation. Expert voice analysis cannot determine the voices recorded from the various audio sources available.

Finally, the most ridiculous statement "Even if Trayvon attacked George Zimmerman, would you not? You are a 17 year-old kid, alone at 23:00, and you notice someone following you... How would you feel?"

A 17 year old kid caught by an adult on other peoples property, cutting through yards at nearly midnight should NEVER contemplate throwing a punch.

Firstly, http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/04/11/150449405/zimmerman-arrested-on-murder-charge-in-martin-case.

Secondly, eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable. http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, your 'debunktion' of the audio is outrageous. Two forensic audio experts, one of them being Thomas J. Owen and the other being Ed Primeau. They analysed the tapes and concluded that the voice screaming for help is not George Zimmerman. Watch the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2r9I2tnnGs&feature=related. Audio issue starts at about 40 seconds.

If you're going to respond to this, I suggest you look at all of my links. Enjoy, friend.

[ProfessorDreadNaught]

Pepsi, I'd say this is like trying to teach my kindergardener son math, but at least he gets it the first time I explain. The NPR article is referring to Mr. Zimmerman being arrested (a second time) on charges of second degree murder. The prosecutor pushing the case forward is States Attorney Angela Corey. She is a politician (her position is an elected one) of a racially weighted Florida district, appointed by another politician (the Governor) who decided on the need for a special prosecutor after pressure from local and national race activists. The local district attorney declined to prosecute because, while the shooting was irregular there was sufficient evidence that the shooting was in self defense. Miss Corey believes (or I should say intends to persuade a jury to believe) that simply producing the gun was self defense enough and that firing the unarmed boy was murder without premeditation.

Again you were wrong about the timeframe in which the police and investigators acted. It is NOT that the authorities did not act in the proper time frame or the proper way. They just did not come to the conclusion the mob wished them to reach.

Next I recognize the unreliability of detailed eye witness statements in many accounts and many instances. I also recognize the ability to ask questions in such a way as to make the same person retell an event in a different way. Still it remains as the most important evidence in a criminal case. I believe, in this case, it is not likely that the witness either imagined the incident or that he was mistaken about a black teen beating up a caucasian male.

Finally, your expert analysis of recordings that night is NOT the ones i would agree with. The more definitive report was released by the FBI who was unable to determine the voice at all. Not that is was unequivocally not that of Mr. Zimmerman or that of Master Trayvon.

I looked at all your links. Perhaps you should too. Try a few more and maybe a more accurate picture may resolve itself to you.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/18/justice/f ... index.html

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

Pepsi, I'd say this is like trying to teach my kindergardener son math, but at least he gets it the first time I explain. The NPR article is referring to Mr. Zimmerman being arrested (a second time) on charges of second degree murder. The prosecutor pushing the case forward is States Attorney Angela Corey. She is a politician (her position is an elected one) of a racially weighted Florida district, appointed by another politician (the Governor) who decided on the need for a special prosecutor after pressure from local and national race activists. The local district attorney declined to prosecute because, while the shooting was irregular there was sufficient evidence that the shooting was in self defense. Miss Corey believes (or I should say intends to persuade a jury to believe) that simply producing the gun was self defense enough and that firing the unarmed boy was murder without premeditation.

Again you were wrong about the timeframe in which the police and investigators acted. It is NOT that the authorities did not act in the proper time frame or the proper way. They just did not come to the conclusion the mob wished them to reach.

Next I recognize the unreliability of detailed eye witness statements in many accounts and many instances. I also recognize the ability to ask questions in such a way as to make the same person retell an event in a different way. Still it remains as the most important evidence in a criminal case. I believe, in this case, it is not likely that the witness either imagined the incident or that he was mistaken about a black teen beating up a caucasian male.

Finally, your expert analysis of recordings that night is NOT the ones i would agree with. The more definitive report was released by the FBI who was unable to determine the voice at all. Not that is was unequivocally not that of Mr. Zimmerman or that of Master Trayvon.

I looked at all your links. Perhaps you should too. Try a few more and maybe a more accurate picture may resolve itself to you.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/18/justice/f ... index.html

The first one to resort to insult to win an argument forfeits all respect. You say that it is unlikely that eyewitnesses imagined a Black teen and a Caucasian male scuffling. Late at night, skin colour is most difficult to determine; your argument is rendered invalid. You perpetually speak out of ignorance. George Zimmerman was not arrested the night of the scene; if you show me evidence proving otherwise, I shall respect it. But as you have done nothing of the sort, I can only believe you are either misinformed or an egregious liar. The Sanford police department admitted to not arresting Zimmerman at the scene; I do not know how you came to believe otherwise.

Here is a transcript of the call:

911 dispatcher:

OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

Zimmerman:

He looks black.

911 dispatcher:

Did you see what he was wearing?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42]

911 dispatcher:

He’s just walking around the area, the houses? OK.

Zimmerman:

Now he’s staring at me. [00:48]

911 dispatcher:

OK, you said that’s 1111 Retreat View or 111?

Zimmerman:

That’s the clubhouse.

911 dispatcher:

He’s near the clubhouse now?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waist band.

And he’s a black male.[1:03]

911 dispatcher:

How old would you say he is?

Zimmerman:

He’s got something on his shirt. About like his late teens.

911 dispatcher:

Late teens?

Zimmerman:

Uh, huh.

Something’s wrong with him. Yep, he’s coming to check me out.

He’s got something in his hands. I don’t know what his deal is. [01:20]

911 dispatcher:

Let me know if he does anything, OK?

Zimmerman:

OK.

911 dispatcher:

We’ve got him on the wire. Just let me know if this guy does anything else.

Zimmerman:

OK.

These [derriere orifice]. They always get away.

When you come to the clubhouse, you come straight in and you go left. Actually, you would go past the clubhouse. [1:39]

911 dispatcher:

OK, so it’s on the left hand side of the clubhouse?

Zimmerman:

Yeah. You go in straight through the entrance and then you would go left. You go straight in, don’t turn and make a left.

He’s running. [2:08]

911 dispatcher:

He’s running? Which way is he running?

Zimmerman:

Down toward the other entrance of the neighborhood. [2:14]

911 dispatcher:

OK, which entrance is that he’s headed towards?

Zimmerman:

The back entrance.

[It sounds like Zimmerman says under his breath, ‘F-ing coons’ at 2:22]

NOTE:

[Listen here at 1:17 for CNN's edited frame]
911 dispatcher:

Are you following him? [2:24]

Zimmerman:

Yeah. [2:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK.

We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]

Zimmerman:

OK. [2:28]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, sir, what is your name? [2:34]

Zimmerman:

George. He ran.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, what’s your last name?

Zimmerman:

Zimmerman.

911 dispatcher:

What’s the phone number you’re calling from?

Zimmerman:

407-435-2400

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, we do have them on the way. Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?

Zimmerman:

Yeah.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, where are you going to meet with them at?

Zimmerman:

Um, if they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse and, uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck. [3:10]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]

Zimmerman:

Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you live in the area?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, yeah, I live here.

911 dispatcher:

OK, what’s your apartment number?

Zimmerman:

It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is [inaudible] [3:40]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? [3:42]

Zimmerman:

Yeah, that’s fine. [3:43]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, I’ll let them know you’ll meet them at …

Zimmerman:

Could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at? [3:49]

911 dispatcher:

OK, that’s no problem.

Zimmerman:

My number … you’ve got it?

911 dispatcher:

Yeah, I’ve got it. 435-2400?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, you got it.

911 dispatcher:

OK, no problem. I’ll let them know to call you when they’re in the area. [4:02]

Zimmerman:

Thanks.

911 dispatcher:

You’re welcome.

Call ends 4:07

This last part is just for your information. I am not informed enough, and I doubt I ever will be, to decide who the aggressor was. You will note that speculation suggests that Zimmerman uttered a racial slur while calling. I am NOT saying the crime was racially motivated, but again, this transcript is just so you can be more informed. You need to be, Dread.

[ProfessorDreadNaught]

Speaking of "egregious liar" please point to ANY credible reference quoting the Sanford Police Department admitting to not arresting Mr. Zimmerman at the scene.

Saying that "late at night skin colour is most difficult to determine" does NOT mean the eyewitness imagined a black teen beating up a caucasian man. Difficult or not, the eyewitness described the scene in this way. Only an idiot or a lawyer would say that because its difficult to determine skin color in the dark the witness must not have really seen anything at all. "your argument is rendered invalid," reads like you are an idiot trying to sound like a lawyer.

It is clear you didn't review the link I posted in my response. Mr. Zimmerman was indeed arrested (correct me if I'm wrong WD-40, but when you are brought in for questioning wearing handcuffs in the back of a patrol car, photographed and fingerprinted it's appropriate to call it being "arrested") but not charged on the night of the incident.

While I appreciate your copying a transcript of the 911 call, being the egregious liar you are (or perhaps just misinformed) you neglected to include the disclaimer to the transcript you posted. It reads:

Above is a transcription of Zimmerman’s call to 911 moments before he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. It was transcribed to the best of the transcriber’s abilities, and is not meant to replace any official transcript of the call.

It was originally posted by a woman named Isabelle Zehnder, an independent writer for an online site called The Examiner. Interestingly, the first comment on her transcription article is a correction from a reader who listened to the audio, it reads:

911 dispatcher:

How old would you say he is? (should be: How old would you say he was?)

Zimmerman:

He’s got something on his shirt. About like his late teens. (Should be: He's got a button on his shirt. Late teens)

911 dispatcher:

Late teens? (Should be: Late teens, okay).

May I have a job transcribing for you?

I am well informed and no kind of liar at all. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for you. You sir, need to read more before you write and should apologize for doctoring so-called evidence (omitting the accuracy disclaimer)

Quit trying to argue, you are NOT very good at it.

[(SWGO)SirPepsi]

I apologise, but I have no idea why the other topic was locked. I will post my response here. Feel free to take it down or lock this as well, but I need to voice a rebuttal:

Speaking of "egregious liar" please point to ANY credible reference quoting the Sanford Police Department admitting to not arresting Mr. Zimmerman at the scene.

Saying that "late at night skin colour is most difficult to determine" does NOT mean the eyewitness imagined a black teen beating up a caucasian man. Difficult or not, the eyewitness described the scene in this way. Only an idiot or a lawyer would say that because its difficult to determine skin color in the dark the witness must not have really seen anything at all. "your argument is rendered invalid," reads like you are an idiot trying to sound like a lawyer.

It is clear you didn't review the link I posted in my response. Mr. Zimmerman was indeed arrested (correct me if I'm wrong WD-40, but when you are brought in for questioning wearing handcuffs in the back of a patrol car, photographed and fingerprinted it's appropriate to call it being "arrested") but not charged on the night of the incident.

While I appreciate your copying a transcript of the 911 call, being the egregious liar you are (or perhaps just misinformed) you neglected to include the disclaimer to the transcript you posted. It reads:

Above is a transcription of Zimmerman’s call to 911 moments before he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. It was transcribed to the best of the transcriber’s abilities, and is not meant to replace any official transcript of the call.

It was originally posted by a woman named Isabelle Zehnder, an independent writer for an online site called The Examiner. Interestingly, the first comment on her transcription article is a correction from a reader who listened to the audio, it reads:

911 dispatcher:

How old would you say he is? (should be: How old would you say he was?)

Zimmerman:

He’s got something on his shirt. About like his late teens. (Should be: He's got a button on his shirt. Late teens)

911 dispatcher:

Late teens? (Should be: Late teens, okay).

May I have a job transcribing for you?

I am well informed and no kind of liar at all. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for you. You sir, need to read more before you write and should apologize for doctoring so-called evidence (omitting the accuracy disclaimer)

Quit trying to argue, you are NOT very good at it.

This is nonsense. I did no such doctoring. If you want me to admit that there is controversy in the transcription, then I will, but you are living an illusion. The Sanford police department did NOT take Zimmerman into custody that night.

In accordance with your polite (yeah, right) request:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2865121/posts

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/03/29/report-police-initially-wanted-to-make-arrest-in-trayvon-martin-case/

It is not uncommon for prosecutors to wait a few days before they make an arrest, because they would want to have enough evidence to charge a suspect with a crime. It was initially reported that Sanford police did not arrest Zimmerman due to lack of probable cause under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” statute. But the Herald report suggests that the department could not move forward after sending the case to Wolfinger’s office and waiting for him to make a determination. Since then, a grand jury was requested to meet April 10, and Corey has been put on the case. Police Chief Bill Lee has temporarily stepped down.

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Zimmerman_Martin_shooting.pdf

Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?
When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr.
Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time
was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida Statute, law
enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and
circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an
arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the
arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in
bad faith, the officer and the City may be held liable...
Norton N. Bonaparte, Jr., ICMA-CM
City Manager
March 23, 2012

Where does your information come from? Zimmerman was NOT taken into custody that night. Whether or not this is justified is not what I am debating currently. You asked me to provide evidence of the Sanford PD admitting to not arresting Zimmerman at the scene, yet I have not seen your evidence to the contrary.

Where in this discussion does my vocabulary pertain to the topic at hand. Because you cannot think of viable arguments, you attack my wording.

If you had looked at my other article a couple of posts ago, you would see that eyewitness accounts become distorted over time; they are in no way reliable. People imagine things! When I provide stark evidence supporting the fact that the voice screaming for help was NOT Zimmerman, you have the blatant audacity to discount two accredited audio experts!

Good day to you sir, and I suggest that you research before continuing your blithering nonsense!

[NiteRunner81]

I locked the post because it got out of hand. ProfessorDread (who always comes to pontificate his way out of trouble), I will not tolerate your name calling and accusations. I am a journalist, and I know that it is hard for NON-journalists to live up to the journalistic code and standards. Also, we are all human, and we should not have to provide disclaimers for EVERYTHING in this world.