Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can you explain to me? How did Zimmerman pull his gun while Trayvon was sitting on Zimmerman's chest/belly and the handgun was in Zimmerman's waist band?
They say the autospy report is under seal until the investigation is complete.
[url=http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-trayvon-martin-autopsy-20120326,0,5032520.story]Trayvon Martin case: What does the autopsy show? - latimes.com[/url]
I agree, but keep in mind that this article is a bit slanted. The Los Angeles times has always been a very conservative, right leaning newspaper. I am not saying this should be a political fight at all, because it isn't. However, with all the media attention and both Democrats and Republicans voicing their opinions, it's turned one. I'm also not saying this isn't a well written and honest article, only that it's saying not to pass judgment until the autopsy is complete, but then continues to say there is evidence that Martin was the aggressor and Zimmerman acted in self defense. It's either one way or the other. We have been debating on this forum about the case, but nobody knows for certain what happened, and probably never will.
However, as Lawrence O'Donnell pointed out in his show last night when he strongly criticized a reporter from the Orlando Sentinel, an article should never write something as fact without naming the source. For example, if Zimmerman claims he was beaten and acted in self defense, then a reporter should state "per Zimmerman's statement" but not write it as if it is gospel.
For example: "Zimmerman has said that he noticed Martin that night in part because the youth was acting strangely -- and possibly on drugs. Was he? Martin had reportedly been suspended from school days earlier after he was found to have an empty marijuana baggie." To me this is not neutral.
Yup, we all know how violent smoking pot makes people, huh? Trayvon has no criminal record for selling or using drugs. So why mention this at all, when the goal of the article is to tell people "We really do not know what happened." This is a sneaky way of pointing a finger while appearing to be unbiased & neutral. I've had a few pee tests for drugs when applying for jobs, so I know it takes only hours to determine if someone is high. (mine were negative, by the way!) Now, what about a different type of article like this one?
[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/the-killing-of-trayvon-martin-more-questions/2011/03/04/gIQALETDeS_blog.html]The killing of Trayvon Martin: More questions - PostPartisan - The Washington Post[/url]
Last edited by justNancy; 03-27-2012 at 03:08 PM..
Sigh. For the N'th time this story is only in the headlines because of the police response (of lack thereof), not because of the shooting itself.
Yes, dozens of people get shot like this kid everyday. But usually the police arrest and charge someone.
In case the post number changes and the link doesn't work, do a search for posts by All American NYC with this text
"Do you agree with the selling of the shirts in the story on the link above"
In case the post number changes and the link doesn't work, do a search for posts by All American NYC with this text
"Do you agree with the selling of the shirts in the story on the link above"
Can you explain to me? How did Zimmerman pull his gun while Trayvon was sitting on Zimmerman's chest/belly and the handgun was in Zimmerman's waist band?
Where did the bullet trike Trayvon?
Honestly, IMO, there is NO WAY he grabbed his gun while on his back getting beat down....it's just impossible if a 6'3 dude is sitting on your chest beating the hell out of you.
I'm betting Trayvon ceded and was getting up and pride + anger kicked in and he pulled out.
Who knows....that makes the most sense to me though.
I agree, but keep in mind that this article is a bit slanted. The Los Angeles times has always been a very conservative, right leaning newspaper. I am not saying this should be a political fight at all, because it isn't. However, with all the media attention and both Democrats and Republicans voicing their opinions, it's turned one. I'm also not saying this isn't a well written and honest article, only that it's saying not to pass judgment until the autopsy is complete, but then continues to say there is evidence that Martin was the aggressor and Zimmerman acted in self defense. It's either one way or the other. We have been debating on this forum about the case, but nobody knows for certain what happened, and probably never will.
However, as Lawrence O'Donnell pointed out in his show last night when he strongly criticized a reporter from the Orlando Sentinel, an article should never write something as fact without naming the source. For example, if Zimmerman claims he was beaten and acted in self defense, then a reporter should state "per Zimmerman's statement" but not write it as if it is gospel.
For example: "Zimmerman has said that he noticed Martin that night in part because the youth was acting strangely -- and possibly on drugs. Was he? Martin had reportedly been suspended from school days earlier after he was found to have an empty marijuana baggie." To me this is not neutral.
Yup, we all know how violent smoking pot makes people, huh? So why mention this at all, when the goal of the article is to tell people "We really do not know what happened." This is a sneaky way of pointing a finger while appearing to be neutral. I've had a few pee for drugs when applying for jobs, so I know it takes a few hours to determine if someone is high. (mine were negative, by the way!) As far as I know, Martin was clean & sober on Feb 26. Now, what about a different type of article like this one?
No, I do agree that the Orlando Sentinel has had some pretty despicable coverage of the events. For example, they will write something like, "Martin was serving out a 10-day suspension at his father's fiancee's house in Orlando." I didn't know that kids "served out" suspensions these days. They're referring to a kid as if he's doing a bid in Attica or Riker's Island.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trayvon has no criminal record for selling or using drugs. So why mention this at all, when the goal of the article is to tell people "We really do not know what happened." This is a sneaky way of pointing a finger while appearing to be unbiased & neutral. I've had a few pee tests for drugs when applying for jobs, so I know it takes only hours to determine if someone is high. (mine were negative, by the way!) Now, what about a different type of article like this one?
This