Who has the best lights in town? Vote now for your favorite in our holiday lights contest.
Figures won’t lie, but liars will figure.
What’s on your mind today?
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
Over 530 Chicago youths(age 20 and under) have been murdered since 2008.
But it was only recently, that our President spoke out about the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.
What time does that party start as I might be a little late getting to it?
Monday, the 2012 Obama hoodies went on sale.
@1 – Never let a crisis go to waste. This administration plays it perfectly. (Please note, this is a compliment, not a bashing of the administration). Their PR/Campaign team is cut throat.
You would prefer a President who kept quiet while the nation roiled?
“Seventy-three percent of people questioned in the survey say that George Zimmerman should be arrested, with 11% disagreeing and 16% unsure.”
Apparently the nation has no opinion on the “530 Chicago youths(age 20 and under) have been murdered since 2008″.
The proper response for the President would have been something like:
“Any time a young life is taken prematurely is a tragedy. But it would be improper for me to comment until the authorities in Sanford have finished their investigation and made a decision on charges to be filed, or not filed, as the case may be. This is not a federal issue, and we have to trust the legal system to ensure that justice will be served. I will have no further comment on this.”
And that would be the end of that.
Not sure what all the fuss is about President Obama’s comment. He was asked at a press conference to discuss the case, and said, “I can only imagine what these parents are going through. When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids, and I think every parent in American should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this.” He also said, “You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”
I suppose you could fault him for sounding like parent in chief.
5 – Luann, it immediately placed the blame on Zimmerman by casting Trayvon in an innocent light. But, unlike President Obama, I was not in Sanford when it happened, and unlike the President, I was not an eye witness to the incident, and I cannot say whether Trayvon truly was an entirely innocent victim, or if Zimmerman WAS acting in self-defense. Until all of that is known, the less said the better.
Nowhere in his statement does he say Trayvon was entirely innocent. He calls for a thorough investigation, the same thing that you said you would seek.
He says he thinks about his own kids. I do not know whether you have yet raised a teenager, but I suspect that you haven’t or you would understand what he is saying. You cannot always be with your teens to protect them from others or from their own immature judgment. Each time they go out the door, you hold your breath until they return safely. That’s what I heard him say.
7 – Luann, I’m not picking on the President, I’m really not. I have a little girl – a long way from a teenager – so I can sympathize to a certain extent.
I see nothing in the President’s statements that expresses the possibility that maybe Zimmerman was a victim too. As a parent, I hope my little girl is never put in a position to have to defend herself with deadly force, but if she is, I would want the justice system to exonerate her.
And as an impartial observer, I understand his compulsion to weigh in on the matter (especially when asked to offer an opinion).
But President Obama should know – HAS to know – how scrutinized his words and actions are, how everyone with an axe – real or imagined – to grind will contort his words one way or the other. He – the President, any President – has to be ultra-careful to walk an absolutely objective line in matters that are not in his lane (as this is not).
Until the facts of the case come out, he needs to take a pass. And even after that, he has to accept that the justice system is working as intended.
Yes, everything he says or does not say will be skewed. So he can either say nothing or say something in a way that says nothing. And he’d be criticized for that as well.
I thought his statement did take a pass on the investigatory aspect; he did not question “the system.” I agree only so far with your last statement. All of us are obligated to reserve judgment on whether the justice system will work as intended until this case is brought to its conclusion. However, if it is demonstrated that there is a flaw in the system, we require of our leaders the wisdom to work to fix that flaw. You don’t accept a broken system.
10 – Luann, an unpopular outcome does not indicate a broken system. The cases that come immediately to mind are the OJ Simpson and Duke Lacrosse cases – most people think OJ was guilty, and most people jumped the gun on the Duke case. But we don’t change the system because one jury got it wrong (in the eyes of most people) and we have to let the facts play out and trust the system. Even if we don’t like the answer.
As a parent, I hope my child, even though grown, is never put in a position to meet someone armed with “deadly force”, but if it happens, I would want my child to fight back and for the justice system to actually investigate and make note that self defense in the face of a gun is still self defense, even if you lose and cannot tell your side of the story. Too often that is not the case.
11 – I assume you stipulate, Sandi, that one does not have to be facing a gun to fear one’s life?
#3 Sandi..obviously a false choice..nothing new.
My point was clearly made that in PREZBO’s hometown there have been large numbers of minority youth shot. What did he have to say then? ZIP! So why the need to talk now? What credibility does he have being this late to the party?
On Tuesday, the 20th Jay Carney, the WH spokesperson said the Whitehouse was aware of the situation, “obviosuly we’re not going to wade into a local law enforcement matter.”…That didn’t last long, did it?
Thursday Obama spoke to Rev Al Sharpton as he was onto his rally in Sanford. Friday, the president made his comments.
And of what value is a poll saying Geo. Zimmerman should be arrested?
That merely reflects opinion generated by the press coverage taking Trayvon’s side in the matter and has nothing to do with Obama’s comments and when he made them.
I was not referring to a jury verdict or an “unpopular outcome.”
The system is not static. New laws are continually advanced to correct perceived deficiencies.
You implied a president has to “accept” the justice system works as intended. He should at the outset trust that it will, but that does not mean that it always will.
13 – how do we know when it doesn’t?
You brought up your fear of your child needing to use deadly force, I brought up my fear of my child meeting it. If you want to change the discussion to one without guns, we can do that.
Anyone who has been involved or close to a criminal proceeding in this nation is not nearly so naive as to think that the justice system “works as intended”. Unless of course your definition of “works as intended” is that prosecutors get a conviction. Certainly a black man in America knows better.
BUD, he was asked about the issue! He did not put out a press release or have a press conference to discuss it. There is no gun summit. I put up the poll to show that the president like the rest of us, has to be aware of the situation and the roiling conflict and that is why he spoke up now, on this case, when asked. If he is asked about the deaths of young men in Chicago, I am willing to bet he will have a comment on that too. So what? He is the president, he is allowed to answer questions and he is allowed to have an opinion. He did nothing to make the situation worse and if anything, his empathy for the emotions of a parent were the right touch in such an overwrought scene. Too many folks have allowed their hatred for Obama to color every word uttered. If the man walked on water, some would go into a snit and say it was just because he could not swim. He cannot win with some of you and should not worry about trying.
OH yeah … back to “you folks just hate Obama”…
Can’t defend him, just throw stuff on the wall hopin’ something sticks.
We know the drill…
16 – Sandi, I certainly agree that justice isn’t always served, and no justice doesn’t mean that the prosecution always gets a conviction. I’m usually one who stands and insists that someone is innocent until proven guilty. And yes, there are certainly people who were acquitted who shouldn’t have been, and people who were convicted who shouldn’t have been. Mistakes do happen, even with a system with as many safeguards and chances for correction as ours has.
But it’s not the President’s job to make sure the justice system works.
The laws in Florida are passed by Floridians, not the President, and enforced by Floridians, not the President. Now, it may generate a case that ultimately makes its way to the Supreme Court, in which case the Supreme Court will decide the Constitutionality of the matter…but the President will not. It is the President’s job to enforce federal law, not state law, and it is not his job to change a state law in Florida.
I DID defend him BUD, try to keep up, and then I gave you my considered opinion on why this happens every time he is seen in public or utters a statement.
I think the President, through the Justice Department is indeed the man responsible for justice being done when there is a national question. I do not think he was precipitous nor were his remarks problematic unless someone is looking for a problem or a nit to pick. That is my opinion. Not one of us says anything off the cuff that we do not think we could have or should have said better later, but I see nothing in his remarks to indict him for.
The nation is looking at this situation and he is the nation’s president and entitled to express himself on the situation. He did nothing to usurp the justice system’s role.
No, it’s a Florida issue. There were no federal statutes involved, it didn’t happen on federal land.
As I said, Sandi, I’m really not picking on Obama. I’m just cautioning against jumping the gun on judgment. The Duke lacrosse players case should have taught us that.
89hoo – Apparently either you missed the inference or you are ignoring the problem. Florida is on the verge of race riots due to this killing. Obama very carefully spoke in a way to insure that justice would be done and for them to not go crazy. It is indeed the President’s responsibility to protect our Nation’s citizens and to step in before a crisis develops in race riots. He did, the temperament has been controlled, at least for the time being.
As for the justice department becoming involved, you have a boy stalked by another, then shot, and no arrest made by the police with no real explanation given. It went on for two weeks with no reasonable explanation. Obviously, there is a good chance race was an issue based on the tapes. Had Florida taken action, they could have avoided the Justice dept being involved. Instead, they ignored the growing firestorm to protect their new law and created a race problem. Hence the Justice Dept.
All of this could have been avoided by one, arresting the shooter as would happen in any other state. let a judge be involved in deciding whether he should be remanded to trial, and if not let go full disclosure or put to trial with full disclosure. Instead, the police and ultimately the state chose to cover it up causing the problems.
It was a Florida incident, it is a national issue. I get your point, I just do not agree that the President said anything remotely untoward.
89Hoo, can you help me with something please? This isn’t a trick question. I’m just trying to clarify something in my head.
Can you define “mal-investment”?
I’m interested in the pure definition. What I mean is, don’t say something like “the govt. lowers interest rates which encourages borrowing more than you can afford” because that would be a definition of government-malinvestment.
I’m interested in knowing what malinvestment is all by itself.
Nevermind. I just looked at wikipedia. It seems you can’t define malinvestment WITHOUT including the government.
Maybe I need to reconsider what I am rooting for in the SCOTUS decision:
“If the Supreme Court strikes down the individual mandate in the new health law, private insurers will swarm Capitol Hill demanding that the law be amended to remove the requirement that they cover people with pre-existing conditions.
When this happens, Obama and the Democrats should say they’re willing to remove that requirement — but only if Medicare is available to all, financed by payroll taxes.
If they did this the public will be behind them — as will the Supreme Court.”
Let’s put more people on a fraud filled health delivery system that’s going broke.
Gotta keep the left around if for nothing else than comic relief!
Well BUD, you do not want people to have to buy insurance, which is the system we have, so what exactly is it that you are supporting? Speaking of “comic relief”, what is the Republican alternative? Please, share?
#22 – “I’m just cautioning against jumping the gun on judgment.”
That gun was jumped the moment Al, Jesse, Louis, and the rest of the race baiters got involved.
Like those of us here, the lynch mobs don’t know all the facts, yet have deemed Zimmerman guilty and are out for blood.
The police are saying the evidence supports Zimmerman’s account of what happened, but no, that’s not good enough to some folks.
Does “Innocent unitl proven guilty” ring a bell?
It would appear not.
I hope to God that some of you never serve on a jury.
Another problem with your scenerio is the work requirement to be eligible for Medicare. We currently have some 40 million without medical insurance.
If Medicare is the only option, half of dem voters couldn’t qualify due to the needed work requirement….so now we have 75 million uninsured plus a few thousand dead people.
And why wouldn’t I want people to purchase medical insurance? Heck even medicare isn’t given free of charge. People are paying $100/mo. for PArt B coverage currently and BUYING supplement coverage for $90/mo. or more now plus their Part D (drug) coverage.
The Republican alternative?? Well let’s start with something constitutional and go from there.
23 – Oh good, another eye witness. Tell us, Rich, what were the circumstances in which – according to other eye witnesses – Zimmerman found himself on his back, with Trayvon punching and pounding away at him, Zimmerman calling for help? Would a reasonable person have felt himself threatened in that situation? Or are the other eye witnesses who claim to have seen this lying, and can your testimony refute theirs?
Those of us who weren’t there really want to know.
You might want to look at the security video being shown by ABC purporting to be of Zimmerman that night.
25 – Scott, I don’t know if “mal-investment” has a definition in pure economic terms, but when I use the term I’m referring to investments (projects undertaken, money spent, etc.) that would not have happened in normal free market conditions. In the aggregate, they fail, and they fail precisely because they do fail outside of normal free market conditions, outside of normal supply and demand laws.
For example, an influx of excess credit causing people to invest in internet companies that don’t make, sell or do anything is mal-investment. Without that excess credit – the non-free market condition – those people would not have invested that way.
That’s not to say that every investment that fails is mal-investment (in the context I intend); investments come and go, some succeed, some do not, and for many reasons.
And not every investment made outside of normal free market conditions fails; but in the aggregate, investment made under these conditions fail.
Again, I don’t know how that squares with any official economic definition, but that’s what I mean when I use the term.
33 – does it refute the eye withnesses (in addition to Rich) who saw Zimmerman on his back being beat up by someone els (reported to be Treyvon)?
I agree 100% Michael@30. It’s emotional driven, ill-informed drivel that is driving this thing.:
“All of this could have been avoided by one, arresting the shooter as would happen in any other state. let a judge be involved in deciding whether he should be remanded to trial, and if not let go full disclosure or put to trial with full disclosure. Instead, the police and ultimately the state chose to cover it up causing the problems.”
In “other states” the prosecutor decides what cases to take to trial, just like he did in this case. In “other states” a shooter isn’t automatically arrested just because he shot someon anymore than is a “puncher” arrested just because he puched someone. Sometimes it is justifiable to punch someone in self-defense and yes, sometimes it is justifiable to shoot someone in self defense, even an unarmed person. In those cases, the shooter does not deserve to be arrested. Do you really want our justice system to start indicting people and taking them to trial not based on evidence, but in spite of it? Do we really want to revert back to trying people based on public opinion and the emotional wishes of a bereaved family? Because that’s what you’re asking for here.
There is a very strong current of reverse racism driving this issue. The traditional race-baiters are trying to use it as a soapbox rather than trying to actually seek justice in this case. To date there has been NO evidence presented to indicate Zimmerman should be charged with anything. Yes, you have a dead guy and Zimmerman killed him. However, you also have witnesses who related accounts of the incident saying that Martin was the aggressor and Zimmerman acted in self-defense. However, this is of no concern to the screamers. Instead they focus on the fact that Martin was a teenager and was unarmed. However, it is well-established point of law and common sense that you do not have to be armed to kill someone. People are beaten to death every day. If someone was beating your head against the sidewalk, would you be afraid? Should you have to just let them kill you because they are unarmed, or because they might be a teenager? Thankfully the law says you can defend yourself.
I am terribly bothered by society’s reaction to this. It is being viewed and discussed from a purely emotive perspective with little or no concern for the facts. The loudest voices in this want to simultaneously shout police cover-up and then complain any time the facts of the investigation are “leaked” or, as described above, anyhting is disclosed. That leads me to ask, do people really want the facts of the investigation released, or do they only want any facts that might incriminate Zimmerman to be released? Based only on what has been reported in the media, a media that by and large seems to be squarely in the Martin camp, there seems to be plenty of indicators that Trayvon Martin had a troubled past. However, those facts are not the ones the public wants released. That would be a “smear campaign” they say. But ask yourself, if you are the accused and the police are investigating a crime, when deciding whether or not to arrest you, do you want the police to consider all the facts known to them, or just the ones that make you look guilty? Should what they know about the other party be considered? And finally, ask yourself, should race, either yours or the other party’s, be a consideration in whether or not to charge you?
I would submit to you that the police/prosecutor should consider ALL the facts and that race, of either suspect or victim, should not be a consideration. Only then will we truly have equal protection under the law. Sadly that is not what the public wants here. The public seems too hung up on the fact that a white/hispanic guy killed an african american teen so, facts aside, in the some people’s eyes, it must be racially motivated.
And again at the risk of being called racist, white supremacist, etc., can someone please explain to me how the actions of many public figures in this case, figures like Spike Lee and the New Black Panther Party, differ from acknowleged hate-mongers like Bill White? The following is a quote from the Roanoke Times coverage of the White case.
“White posted the juror’s name and contact information, but made no direct threats against him. Prosecutors argued, and the jury agreed, that the post amounted to an invitation of harm when taken in context with the campaign of intimidation and thinly veiled threats that White maintained on his now defunct website, overthrow.com.”
Yet in this case,the New Black Panther party put a $10,000 bounty out for the capture of Zimmerman, who at present is not wanted. So in essence they are offering ten thousand dollars to anyone willing to kidnap Zimmerman. Next, Spike Lee re-tweets a tweet containing the supposed address Zimmerman was staying and urged people to, and I quote, “REACH OUT & TOUCH” Zimmerman. However, there is no talk of prosecuting these people and the public simply excuses their actions as being motivated by shared outrage over Martin’s case. The really sad part is Spike Lee’s Facebook friend got his facts wrong and published the wrong address. So now an elderly couple who are completely un-involved in the Martin case are suffering the results of this irresponsible tweet.
And still, no one really seems to care.Again, it’s excusable because “they were upset.”
But again, I’m asking. If White’s act of publishing addresses with no included threat was deemed to have carried with it an implied invitation to commit violence against the person at the address, how in the world does Lee’s action, which included an express suggestion to “REACH OUT & TOUCH” Zimmerman, not rise to the same level? Where is the outrage at that? Should Spike Lee and Marcus Higgins be prosecuted?
This event was a tragedy that has clearly shaken not only the Sanford community but the country as well. However, we as a society, if we truly want a society of laws, should wait for the results of the investigation before concluding that there was racism or a cover-up. We should also be prepared to accept a conclusion based on evidence and fact, even if it does not satisfy the raw emotions brought on anytime a tragedy occurs.
If you measure investment as only dollars and cents, sure many if not most government investment of tax dollars is “malinvestment”. Libraries, parks, pools, greenways, gyms, could all be looked at as malinvested money. But they are good, quality of life societal additions.
Caring for people who are elderly, disabled, dysfunctional, underemployed or just unemployed seems like malinvestment to many, but in reality it is what makes us a better nation, keeps beggars out of the streets, neighborhoods relatively safe, families intact, and epidemics under control. Societal unrest and class warfare over the aid has been ugly and there is no way to end much of what we have. I guess it depends on what kind of person you are as to whether you consider it a malinvestment of money well spent, but in serious need of reform.
Military spending has definitely been malinvestment. I do not know who made us the world’s police force but the ROI and the lost treasure and money has not been worth it IMO.
Foreign Aid is important on the global stage. We help nations that in turn offer us resources and that was working great for a while. Now China and India are competitors so that dynamic has changed and the Middle East is forever a war zone. Serious malinvestment there.
Taxes lower than the tipping point for meeting the budget for how many years now? Certainly malinvestment there! Regardless of what you want, you have to pay for it. The tax breaks that reduced revenue while we were spending like crazy on wars and safety nets was just unconscionable. If your income does not meet your expenses, voluntarily lowering your income is not a healthy decision.
Government allowing lobbyists and legislators on retainer to write legislation favoring one industry, one economic view, one social agenda, one world view etc. God awful malinvestment there!
And most of the malinvestment has been bipartisan and back scratching at it’s finest. I believe the saying is you cannot serve God and mammon, well you also cannot serve the nation and mammon.
Do you have a link to eye witnesses who saw this “beating”?
BUD, forget the “problems” you see in “my” scenario. Let’s here the TP/GOP version of fixing the health care runaway train. If they strike down the mandate, the pre-existing and uniform costs are GONE (for starters), no insurance company is going to take that risk and who would blame them? Come on, this is a HUGE government expense, let’s here your solution.
Chuck, no doubt about it Spike Lee and anyone else who “tweeted” anyone’s address should be charged. Kinda like the issue that came up in the Perriello case, where his brother, whose address was targeted by tea party activist was released to the public. It is wrong and it should be investigated and punished as intimidation by the poster because that is what it is. It is inciting violence.
I also do not support or defend the public protests and threats and the “New Black Panthers” hate group should be investigated for that “bounty” too. There is no place for that kind of activity no matter how bad you think this has been handled.
One thing that keeps striking me is how could he have been in a struggle with Martin and shot him and not have blood all over his clothes? Does not a gunshot to the chest produce copious bleeding? Zimmerman’s undershirt is visible in the intake video and no blood is visible. If his nose bled and he shot someone in close combat, would he not have blood on him? This case gets curioser and curioser for sure, but violence, threats and abuse of free speech to intimidate needs to be dealt with by police and the media needs to not give it legs. Some folks are just making this worse.
37 – Sandi, I don’t know if this post was directed at my response to Scott’s question, but nowhere did I single out anyone as being more guilty of mal-investment than anyone else, and I didn’t even mention government action. I stated that when I use the term “mal-investment” I mean investment that would not happen in normal free market conditions. The example I gave, of investors throwing money at internet companies that don’t do anything is NOT an example of government spending.
Of course, we have to address how the conditions moved away from normal market conditions (I said that poorly, but you get my drift)…those are often – but not exclusively – creations of government action. A company that wants to start a buggy-whip concern in Roanoke tomorrow, for example, would be seriously mal-investing his money, and for reasons that have nothing to do with government, and everything to do with technology.
What you say about government spending is true, but I believe there are inherently government functions that probably, on a pure economic basis, would qualify as mal-investment (I think you and I agree on this point). In this regard, some concessions have to be made. But these should be minimized, as all mal-investment is harmful, even if necessary. And I take a much narrower view of what is an inherent function function than most liberals.
38…”Do you have a link to eye witnesses who saw this “beating”?”
Do you have a link to eye witnesses who say a beating didn’t occur?
Sandi, I spent a whle typing a long reply only to have it eaten by the Captcha monster.I am not going to re-type it. However, I will say this. There are hundreds of links to all of this. I am only including two. You decide which one seems like objective news and which one seems like inflamatory speculation.
Also, the interview with the family the day after the shooting raises a question for me. If you have followed the story closely, it seems that the family’s account has changed a few times as well.
Luanne, much is being made of the fact that Zimmerman doesn’t appear to be very badly beaten in the video that admittedly does not show close ups. However, is it not standard police procedure to provide medical care for injuries of persons in custody? Or do you think they should just cuff a man who is bleeding from the nose and head and drag him down to the station for questioning without even patching him up? If they had and he confessed to premeditated murder, his confession would in all likelihood be suppressed. Here is a link to the story.
Everyone seems to want to find a conspiracy here, so in all liklihood the political powers that be will throw a few people under the bus. However, the reality of this is, there may not have been a conspiracy. It was definitely a tragedy, but it may well have been a justifiable shooting.
And still it seems that no one is even willing to touch the whole Spike Lee thing. Why does Lee get a pass on that?
Chuck, did you read my post? I agreed that the rhetoric, protests and charges are getting out of control and dangerous. What more you want from me I do not know.
If you really believe that the police always “provide medical care for injuries of persons in custody” at the scene or before the police station or at the police station, I need to know where you live? People are thrown into squad cars in their underwear, disheveled and bleeding every day. I do not know if he received any medical attention or even a wet wipe but if so it needs to surface because so far it is not looking any better for him to claim being “beaten”.
If you can applaud that police department, you go right ahead.
89Hoo, my post was not “directed” at anyone, the discussion was the meaning of malinvestment and I gave examples of when it is a good, necessary or important thing, even if seen as the wrong thing.
I am sorry but the robber baron days of tenement housing and TB for workers versus Central Park for the bosses; shotgun shacks rented from the company store with barefoot children versus mansions on a hill, has simply soured me on the whole “market control” mantra. I do not buy it.
To #43 (Chuck): I have a “Control A-C-R-V” sequence for dealing with the CAPTCHA monster.
[ctrl-A] to “select all” of your typed text.
[ctrl-C] to “copy” your selection into your web browser’s internal clipboard.
[ctrl-R] to force the web-page to reload (and thereby provide an unexpired CAPTCHA code).
[ctrl-V] to “paste” your copied text back into the entry box on the web page.
I pretty much do this every time I type a response that’s more than two sentences. Got tired of losing my work.
Chuck, use Google Chrome as your browser and you can just hit the back button, it is there every time.
I use Chrome on my PCs and MacIntii, and use the sign-in/sync feature to keep all the shortcuts/favorites sync’d across platforms. Good stuff.
The keyboard shortcuts, above, work across all Microsoft Products*, and most others that adhere to CUA standards.
* except for ctrl-r, which is mostly browser specific. F5 to refresh or shift-F5 for “force” refresh works in most browsers, as well.
32. 89hoo – Apparently you were a witness as you seem to know all the facts. My statement was one – Obama spoke up as President to try to calm therace tensions that have been mounting to assure everyone that justice (whatever that might be) will be done and for everyone to calm down and wait. Secondly, I said the US Justice department became involved when the local police and the state did not seem to have a good explanation for what happened when an unarmed man was shot to death. It does not matter what did or did not happen, what matters is there is little indication that the case was investigated and the local government has not been forth coming in the matter.
You seem to think Obama or the justice dept had no reason to get involved when such a case is obviously raising national race tensions and could easily blow into riots. Obama stepped in as President and as a Black Man to state that the case will be handled according to the law and for wvreyone to calm down. It seemed to work. Now what is your problem?
I wonder if Detroit’s 34 justifiable homicides in 2011 got as much scrutiny: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/10778-detroit-with-fewer-police-and-rising-crime-qjustifiable-homicidesq-soar
Dear Lord, do not be finding more!
Sorry Sandi, your post in re: Spike Lee wasn’t up when I replied. As to the medical care for arrestees, it is a standard legal requirement. Yes, people are hauled off in patrol cars, but they are treated before they are just thrown in lock-up or, before they are interviewed. It would be idiotic to do otherwise because it is well established law that any statements made when detainees are denied the basic necessities of life cannot be used against them.
And why does it need to surface? Do you not see that this public demand to know every detail of a criminal investigation immediately is not helping? It is disruptive to the investigation and it leads to misunderstandings. It takes a while to gather all the info, and more importantly, confirm it. It would be grossly irresponsible to start to release details immediately. Initial information is often incorrect or incomplete. If it is released immediately, then when the investigators try to make corrections or clarifications, people like AL Sharpton go on TV and scream about “irregularities”. Lawyers use it in court to make it look like the police are incompetent when in reality, witness accounts change over time and new facts come to light as a case progresses.
The truth of it is, neither you nor I are in a position to applaud or condemn the Sanford PD. Neither of us knows the facts. We only know what the talking heads are telling us and they are motivated by anything and everything but finding the truth.
I forgot to address the blood issue. You might find blood on the suspect in a close quarter shooting and you might not. It depends on several factors. Some bullet wounds bleed profusely externally while others bleed very little externally but heavily internally. It also depends on how long the heart beats after the shot. If the person dies quickly, bleeding stops when the heart stops so you wouldn’t see a lot of blood. I have no firsthand knowledge of this case, but I would suspect that if Zimmerman was on the bottom and shot Martin from this position, it is entirely possible that he got some of Martin’s blood on him but, given that the police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of the head, some of the visible blood may have been Martin’s. The police would normally collect the shooter’s clothes as soon as possible as well and that might explain why Zimmerman doesn’t appear to be too disheveled in the “scandalous” video. Is it possible that the outer clothes he was wearing at the scene had already been collected? The fact is, we don’t know. All of this speculation is just that, uninformed speculation and personally, I don’t expect the police to waste time trying to keep the media informed of every step they take.
If the volatility of this case was not also an issue, I would agree that none of us have any right to ask for information but it can only help to quell the burning rage if information is released quickly and verified. At this point holding things back and not answering concerns looks like a cover up. I do not know Florida law but Virginia police are not charged with investigating anything that disproves the case they are trying to make and neither is the prosecutor. Until you go to trial their goal is making their case. The you get to present your argument. In this situation that will simply not do. Whether that is comfortable for people or not is no longer the question.
Name is required
A valid email is required (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Comment is required
Your email address will not be published.All fields are required to comment.
Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:06:31 +0000