tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post8248008508855237562..comments2024-03-29T06:44:19.414-04:00Comments on the daily howler: Too perfect but also too awful!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-20238508854912570612013-07-16T00:15:40.273-04:002013-07-16T00:15:40.273-04:00Re: your point 9.
Actions have consequences. Hope...Re: your point 9.<br />Actions have consequences. Hopefully Zimmerman will learn from his mistakes. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-51775020585772605222013-07-15T22:40:06.211-04:002013-07-15T22:40:06.211-04:00Doesn't take mind-reading to see the endless f...Doesn't take mind-reading to see the endless fake race-pimping over this case...<br /><br />Pretending the racial harm is due to Zimmerman, or to Somerby, or to commenters here who agree with Somerby, rather than to the lying race-pimps who've made the case about race -- that's the classless thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-21387952090728781202013-07-15T22:25:34.143-04:002013-07-15T22:25:34.143-04:00Anonymous on July 15, 2013 at 4:57 PM,
You've...Anonymous on July 15, 2013 at 4:57 PM,<br /><br />You've got the words right, but not the tune. When TDH quotes Zimmerman, it's not to declare that what he said is truth but that what he said is disputed. On 4/18, TDH complained that Charles Blow wrote that Zimmerman pursued Martin after being advised not to do so by a police dispatcher. But that's not a fact; it's a statement from the special prosecutor's information (i.e., the indictment). Zimmerman says otherwise. I doubt TDH thought that self-serving statement was a fact either. Most of the "facts" about the last moments of Martin's life are in dispute. It's a tragic irony that the reason is that Zimmerman killed the only other eyewitness to most of those moments. But that doesn't mean we thereby know what happened. <br />deadratnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-21313151439991507902013-07-15T21:19:31.650-04:002013-07-15T21:19:31.650-04:00I like the way he blames we, the people, for the m...I like the way he blames we, the people, for the media's malfeasance. Why does the media like these simple narratives? Because "Those tales are much easier for readers and viewers to relate to."<br /><br />See, it's the readers and viewers who won't eat their vegetables (facts) that's why we feed them sugar and salt instead.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-6198834686704691902013-07-15T20:22:00.135-04:002013-07-15T20:22:00.135-04:00Anon714, your problem lies in the fact that you in...Anon714, your problem lies in the fact that you inexplicably equate a demand for media accuracy in conveying the entire story, as an attempt to get you to believe something.CeceliaMchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16017255006204800193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-71653397503995473752013-07-15T20:06:13.602-04:002013-07-15T20:06:13.602-04:00On the contrary, I haven't simultaneously argu...On the contrary, I haven't simultaneously argued against Zimmerman by suggesting that he could be lying out of self-interest, while simultaneously suggesting that it's "smug" to reply that his defense persuaded six jurors in a court of law.CeceliaMchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16017255006204800193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-79722883422069416462013-07-15T20:01:19.706-04:002013-07-15T20:01:19.706-04:00Anonymous at 4:35. Here are some known facts you e...Anonymous at 4:35. Here are some known facts you excluded from your list for some reason:<br /><br />3a. Zimmerman said OK and stopped following Martin. Based on his position when the attack occurred, he was headed back to his truck.<br /><br />3b. Martin, instead of going home, spent 4 minutes talking on his cell phone, at the end of which he confronted Zimmerman near his truck, asking him why he was following him (based on Jeantel's testimony of the cell conversation). To do this, he would have had to double back from the direction he was going in when Zimmerman was told "we don't need you to do that." We know this position because of the location of the body after the shooting.<br /><br />5a. The confrontation got physical and Zimmerman was hurt during it (based on medical examination of his wounds). Other than the fatal gunshot, Martin's wounds were only to his knuckles (based on medical examiner's testimony).<br /><br />5b. There was a credible eyewitness who saw Martin straddling Zimmerman and beating him with both arms. <br /><br />6a. Martin's family members were inconsistent about whether Martin was calling for help. Zimmerman family members were consistent that it was Zimmerman's voice calling for help.<br /><br />7a. After the shooting Martin was unable to call for help due to his injury. Zimmerman had no further need to call for help because he was no longer being beaten. <br /><br />8. Immediately after the shooting there was an investigation in which Zimmerman's gun was taken from him, his wounds were noted, his statement was taken and he was released. It was determined that sufficient probability of self defense existed to preclude successful prosecution against a self-defense claim.<br /><br />9. Pressure was instigated by the family's attorney via civil rights activists and media to force the federal government to investigate hate crime allegations and charge Zimmerman with a crime. Claims of bias were made against the police. A variety of false statements were made and propagated by the media against Zimmerman accusing him of racial animosity and vigilantism. <br /><br />9. Zimmerman lost his job. He and his family had to change address to escape harassment. He and his wife had to put up a large bond once he was charged with a crime and had to secure services of an attorney to defend himself. They handled their financial difficulties poorly and Zimmerman's wife lied to the court about funds raised for his defense on the internet (it is unclear whether that was deliberate or mistaken). Zimmerman has suffered a major disruption of his life, gaining a great deal of weight since his arrest. Personal events of his life have been publicized and distorting to present an ugly picture of him as a human being. He has been championed by unsavory characters and fringe elements on the right in ways that may not have been welcome either. He is still alive but his life has been altered irreparably and he has had to face severe stress and challenges as a result of the confrontation apparently instigated by Martin (based on the timing, location, and Jeantel's testimony about their cell phone call).<br /><br />10. Things aren't over yet. People on the internet are calling for Zimmerman to be shot (by people who will then claim self-defense). Corey is calling for the justice department to get involved again, which it may do. Martin's lawyers are still talking about filing civil suits (despite these being precluded by Florida self-defense law). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-37364014601242003192013-07-15T19:55:25.400-04:002013-07-15T19:55:25.400-04:00A criminal defendant does not even have to offer a...A criminal defendant does not even have to offer a defense at all. The prosecution is required to prove the entirety of its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that burden never shifts to the defendant. <br /><br />At one time, the Arizona self-defense statute required the defendant to prove - by a preponderance of evidence (ie. more likely than not)that she or he acted in self-defense, but the Supremes held that it violated the 5th amendment (to many of you surprised that there are more than 2 amendments, sorry, there's more than 2). <br /><br />Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with anything Somerby posted here, but what else is new.Matlocknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-32917666713565880412013-07-15T19:46:56.599-04:002013-07-15T19:46:56.599-04:00"Please try to find it in your heart to forgi..."Please try to find it in your heart to forgive us all for squelching your opinions in this matter..."<br /><br />As someone constantly bemoaning the level of nastiness in discourse nowadays, you sure have a hard time following your own advice.gaminjebnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-40018455393995375922013-07-15T19:37:44.355-04:002013-07-15T19:37:44.355-04:00Balance would require a reporter to acknowledge wh...Balance would require a reporter to acknowledge what Zimmerman says, not ignore it. What he said is a fact, even if his claims are not factually true. Are you saying that Zimmerman shouldn't have his side reported in a balanced news article?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-86880358607929547402013-07-15T19:34:53.790-04:002013-07-15T19:34:53.790-04:00You left out "scintillating and thought-provo...You left out "scintillating and thought-provoking."Orlandonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-58090871072694701152013-07-15T19:32:58.046-04:002013-07-15T19:32:58.046-04:00Anon@532: get your quote right. Dean Wormer told F...Anon@532: get your quote right. Dean Wormer told Flounder "Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son."Otternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-25724286121037214912013-07-15T19:14:09.894-04:002013-07-15T19:14:09.894-04:00CeMc, CeMc, CeMc,
Somerby has flayed "liberal...CeMc, CeMc, CeMc,<br />Somerby has flayed "liberals" and the MSM incessantly for saying many things that are not "facts". Correctly so. <br />If you don't know this then you are new to his web site.<br />Just a few examples of the falsity of the "MSM" & "liberals" as cited by Somerby:<br />1) Zimmerman was told to stay in his vehicle when he was already out of his vehicle (see his post above).<br />2) Ms. Jeantel was not 16 years old but 17. (Yesterdays post). <br />There are many, many more.<br />My issue is when he writes that "Zimmerman says..." and expects me to accept these statements as "fact". These are trivial examples used to make the point, again. Because "Zimmerman says..." does not make it a "fact".<br />"Zimmerman says...", "Zimmerman says...". I could write a song.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-46605969533128546852013-07-15T18:53:01.048-04:002013-07-15T18:53:01.048-04:00Anon at 5:59, you need to consider the words in th...Anon at 5:59, you need to consider the words in their context. He is talking with the dispatcher who tells him to wait for the police. He then says the line about the punks always getting away. He is not talking about Trayvon but about the difficulties with waiting for the police and he is frustrated about the delay. Punk and asshole is soft -- I call people assholes in traffic when they do something annoying. Punk is hardly a strong word and many people say "fucking" as part of everyday conversation, almost every other word. It is only heated when accompanied by a tone of voice and in a context, and even then there are a lot worse words. Trayvon's use of crazy-assed Cracker is worse because it is specifically derogatory of a racial group, whereas punk and asshole is not. So, yes, I think it was pretty soft language and not specifically racial on Zimmerman's part. Again, context matters and both men were young, male and from a social class that uses casual profanity. And yes, guys do use slurs as terms of endearment in many contexts. Tone of voice matters. To try to parse language without considering these things is to distort meaning. Somerby's point has been that distortions have been motivated to support a particular narrative. If you want Zimmerman to look bad, profess shock at the word "fuck" even though no one blushes at that any more. If you want Martin to look bad, "crazy-assed Cracker" does the job. He may have meant it with no more heat than Zimmerman -- I don't know because we have that via Jeantel's testimony, but anyone who has heard urban teens talk wouldn't assume much from it. Neither phrase belongs on your list of incriminating facts, in my opinion. Item 4 is part of the prosecution's attempt to gin up bogus hostile intent that the jury wasn't convinced existed. It is dishonest to use language that way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-77632579051783014122013-07-15T18:03:14.096-04:002013-07-15T18:03:14.096-04:00Anonymous 0532, please tell me what fact "lib...Anonymous 0532, please tell me what fact "liberals" gave in this matter that Somerby decried.<br /><br />Is it factual for the media to flatly report that Zimmerman did not obey the 911 dispatcher simply because Zimmerman said he did return to his truck?<br /><br />Wouldn't an accurate statement in reporting this be that Zimmerman was told to go back to his vehicle and he claimed to have complied?<br /><br />Is it okay to bemoan the fact that it wasn't reported in this manner?<br /><br />Is that too biased on the side of Zimmerman for you?<br /><br />Is it too biased as well for people who differ with you to argue that the defense not only claimed this but via a time line and physical dynamics persuaded a jury as well?CeceliaMchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16017255006204800193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-62050195578743488752013-07-15T17:35:55.340-04:002013-07-15T17:35:55.340-04:00Whatever Zimmerman says is not a fact...because he...Whatever Zimmerman says is not a fact...because he says so. It may be a fact however if it is supported by other evidence, as many of his statements were. You cannot automatically believe something because Zimmerman said it, but you cannot automatically discount what he said simply because he said it either. You establish the facts by corroborating them. <br /><br />I do take issue with #4. It isn't clear whether Zimmerman was referring to Martin or whether he was referring to burglary suspects in the past who did get away. He referred to Martin's behavior as suspicious or on drugs. With his statement about punks, he could have been referring to the more general frustration that past suspects have gotten away before the police arrived, without talking specifically about Martin. The prosecution tried to build this up into intent based on animosity but the language is too soft for that and his tone of voice is calm when he says it. Martin's comment about Zimmerman is much worse in terms of betraying animosity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-38838691191935384492013-07-15T17:32:42.300-04:002013-07-15T17:32:42.300-04:00Willful ignorance is no way to go through life CeM...Willful ignorance is no way to go through life CeMc. Where did I mention testimony to the jury? Where did I assert that Zimmerman goes free because of anything Somerby said? Re-read what I said. Somerby asserted time and again, to bolster his arguments, that "Zimmerman says...". But he decries everyone else (liberals) who say things that are NOT factual. <br />To reiterate: Martin is dead. Zimmerman killed him. Your rationalizations for the killing are only that. You, I (or Somerby) have no idea exactly what happened. <br />List the known "facts" that I omitted. <br />Not what "Zimmerman says...". Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-63462554528637923622013-07-15T17:29:00.776-04:002013-07-15T17:29:00.776-04:00MCH, you are the one equating Sombery's report...MCH, you are the one equating Sombery's reporting of media inaccuracies as aiding and abetting those who minimize racism.<br /><br />As though a condemnation of a trial by media must come with a caveat for your bugaboo about smug prejudice deniers.<br /><br />It's perfectly logical that one with answer THIS narrative with the fact that six jurors found the guy not guilty, despite the profound observation that a guy being tried for second degree murder might have some self-interest.<br /><br />Both sides made a case. I'm afraid that the outcome of that does bolster the arguments of those who differ with you on this matter.<br /><br />I am aware if these folks aren't outright abetting racism with their opinion they are essentially (and smugly) squelching your right to hold yours simply by bolstering their own arguments via the results of the trial...<br /><br />I suppose that goes right along with juror's temerity at not discounting Zimmerman's defense as "self-interest" at the onset and somehow finding it compelling enough to give them reasonable doubt as to his guilt.<br /><br />Please try to find it in your heart to forgive us all for squelching your opinions in this manner...CeceliaMchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16017255006204800193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-20391747822510703452013-07-15T17:21:01.676-04:002013-07-15T17:21:01.676-04:00Zimmerman's self defense claim is based on his...Zimmerman's self defense claim is based on his recitation of events coupled with the evidence of eyewitnesses and the physical evidence. Eyewitnesses include people who saw Trayvon behaving suspiciously, Jeantel's phone conversation with him, John Good who saw Trayvon straddling and beating Zimmerman, and Zimmerman's calls to the dispatcher and statement to the police. Physical evidence includes Martin's DNA on Zimmerman's jacket, Zimmerman's physical injuries and Martin's lack of such injuries (except to his hands), the reconstruction of what occurred based on the angle of the shot and wound, and blood and gunpowder residue (as much as was preserved). This was what was available to the Jury. Additionally, we spectators have available the contents of Trayvon's cell phone, his problems with school suspension, previous fighting, previous involvement in burglaries, tox screen results showing drug use on the night he was killed, and the statements of his family. <br /><br />The anti-Zimmerman people have been emphasizing that there is nothing available on which to base an opinion except Zimmerman's statement (because Martin is dead) and then claiming that Zimmerman lied. This is a way to discredit Zimmerman but it does not address the large amount of evidence beyond his statement that tends to support it and to make it clear that self-defense was possible. At that point, there is a reasonable doubt and the Jury must acquit. <br /><br />The point now is that prosecutors, who are experts in evaluating evidence and understanding what the law requires for conviction, should have been able to see that this verdict was probably based on their own access to that same evidence, and they should have realized they had no case. The underhandedness of the prosecution largely results from the fact that they had no case, in my opinion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-49436594334180828232013-07-15T17:04:56.990-04:002013-07-15T17:04:56.990-04:00Well said, Anonymous @3:35. At to Cecelia's re...Well said, Anonymous @3:35. At to Cecelia's repeated comments here (and I do appreciate her insistence on the "assumed innocent" concept): we are talking about a trial and its outcome when we speak of guilt, innocence, not-guiltiness -- a person's status in the eyes of the jury and therefore of the state in its subsequent treatment of the person charged. Nothing requires any of us as fellow citizens or neighbors to agree with verdicts or, even if we agree that they were soundly arrived at in the context of the law and facts the jury was given to consider, to agree that the person was in fact guilty or innocent. "Not proven guilty" at least has the virtue of acknowledging not just the limits of a criminal trial's ability to arrive at the truth, but our freedom of thought, whatever the jury decided.<br /><br />It's precisely the smug "all has been established now" attitude of the Z zealots in these comments that makes me feel like I'm not supposed to be allowed even my own thoughts. (FREEDOM, conservatives' favorite word -- freedom for themselves, anyway.) mchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-24401327656447519882013-07-15T17:04:39.290-04:002013-07-15T17:04:39.290-04:00Is Zimmerman a free man because Bob Somerby declar...Is Zimmerman a free man because Bob Somerby declared him not guilty, or was there an actual trial where the defense and prosecution both presented their cases to a jury?CeceliaMchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16017255006204800193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-15448949412697530262013-07-15T17:01:39.835-04:002013-07-15T17:01:39.835-04:00He was on his way to Target, not cruising as a Nei...He was on his way to Target, not cruising as a Neighborhood Watch patrol, when he saw Trayvon behaving suspiciously. At that point he did call the police and when they told him not to follow, he said OK and all the evidence suggests has was going back to his car at that point. But don't let the facts confuse you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-25476406128772316162013-07-15T16:58:43.650-04:002013-07-15T16:58:43.650-04:00We're any of these points kept from the jury o...We're any of these points kept from the jury or disputed by the defense ( or Somerby)?CeceliaMchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16017255006204800193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-6942366872807688502013-07-15T16:57:25.036-04:002013-07-15T16:57:25.036-04:00Ignorance is bliss; it's folly to resist.
Loo...Ignorance is bliss; it's folly to resist. <br />Look again at Somerby's many posts on this issue and count the number of times he writes that "Zimmerman says...". <br />i.e. If Zimmerman says it, ipso facto, it's a "fact".<br />I could write a song: "Zimmerman says..., Zimmerman says...".<br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-67885169165644025652013-07-15T16:43:18.047-04:002013-07-15T16:43:18.047-04:00AnonymousJuly 15, 2013 at 4:35 PM -- I agree that ...AnonymousJuly 15, 2013 at 4:35 PM -- I agree that the seven items you listed are true. So, what's your point? David in Calnoreply@blogger.com