Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman trial

[PatPig]

Just kicked off in the US.

Many in the media are determined to define this as a racist killing.

TheIndependent goes with 'young black man Trayvon Martin was killed last year by white Hispanic neighbourhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman.'
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trayvon-martin-america-takes-sides-8651354.html

Under most other circumstances Zimmerman would be described as Hispanic.

But it seems that 'white' trumps Hispanic.

Barack Obama, who had a white mother and black father, is America's 'first black President'.

Zimmerman, who had a white father, Peruvian mother, and having shot a black man, is 'white'.

(It is not clear to me why Hispanics, white or otherwise, should not be racist towards African Americans, but apparently for some racism is a simple white vs black issue, so it is important to define Zimmerman as a white man.)

The trial is being screened live:

www.wftv.com/videos/news/wftv-newscast/v3G5b/

Public opinion, as with votes for Obama, split down racial lines, with black people believing Zimmerman is guilty, and whites much less likely to do so.
www.gallup.com/poll/153776/blacks-nonblacks-hold-sharply-different-views-martin-case.aspx

I have no idea whether he deserved it. I find it frankly bizarre that so many people thousands of miles from the event can claim such intimate knowledge of what happened.

For instance testimony offered today suggests that the screams were more likely to be those of Zimmerman, not Martin. Either way, no expert is certain on this. But you apparently know better.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman is racist. A white male of similar appearance could also appear suspicious and lead a vigilante type to follow him.

It's absurd that because someone has been shot and the shooter and victim are not of the same race, racism is screamed with no evidence.

Clearly Zimmerman does nt have some sort of pathological hatred of black people. He regarded Trayvon as suspicious, followed him and then he was shot.

There are lots of cases of vigilante types pursuing people who turn out to be innocence. Racial differences between the vigilante and target are not always present, and it's wholly unreasonable to say racist just because they are not of the same race.

I may be thousands of miles away but I have taken an interest in this case the first day the murder was reported. I've listened to every recording and I do not believe zimmerman is the person asking for help. The voice is whiny and that of a younger person. A young man walking around talking to his friend on the phone does not deserve to die. Maybe he did struggle on the ground with zimmerman but this man had followed him, despite the fact that Trayvon had appeared to try and put some distance between the two of them. Race is an issue here. It's the usual stereotypes going round...you need to be black to have a proper understanding of it. It happens on a daily basis.

The evidence was unclear as to whose voice it was, an expert from Florida claiming it was Martin, an expert from elsewhere claiming it was Zimmerman.
Whatever, it looks as though Zimmerman deliberately shot Martin, and that it was a racist attack.
Pat
Can we use black people, please, not blacks. Thank you.

'Blacks' and 'whites' are used equally in this thread.

I have yet to see any evidence that Zimmerman is racist. I can believe that he is a vigilante/trigger happy, but I don't see him as a KKK-type by any means.

So use white people as well, please.

Goodness, yes, can we call people people? It makes me really uncomfortable when people are called Blacks or Poles or Downs or, memorably on one thread, wheelchair.

I think it's hard when a person is white to understand the being watched, being 'suspicious thing'. I only slightly have an inkling because of having friends and a couple of boyfriends who are/were of colour. Some pubs we couldn't go in together, some people we had to avoid.

I went to a comedy night once where the Black American comic said how much he liked coming to London because people of different races were sitting with each other, dating, kissing, holding hands and no one batted an eyelid. He said it was extremely unusual in the States and would have caused comment. This is the environment this killing happened in. A deeply racist, very divided country.

What an environment where the killer had a white father, Hispanic mother, and a black great-grandfather?

Are you really saying that the US isn't a racist society because this killer had a mixed heritage family? My DH cleans. Doesn't mean we don't live in a patriarchy.

Pat
Your terminology is racist, please accept that and do as asked.
As for your mixed race point, there isn't one.

I recall once making a comment about African politics while down at the pub for a TGI Friday drinkup with some co-workers and I got accused of being a racist. The conversation then turned to US foreign policy. Phrases like 'obese ignorant Americans' were thrown around and anecdotes about loud American tourists were swapped.

To a lot of people racism is a white on black thing. That is why Zimmerman is being presented as 'white'. Otherwise the 'racist' label won't stick.

In my opinion Zimmerman provoked the confrontation. He saw a youth walking through his neighborhood and despite the instructions from the 911 operator he decided to confront Martin.

How many of us, when confronted with a stranger demanding to know why we were in the neighborhood, are going to be in a cooperative mood? A struggle ensued where Martin was fatally shot. Do I believe that Zimmerman set out to 'shoot a black man'? Of course not but Martin would be alive today if Zimmerman had hanged back and waited for the cops.

I do not think that Martin was targeted because he was black and therefore didn't belong there (by all accounts it was a racially mixed estate). A few years ago a white Brit friend was stopped by some LAPD cops in a passing cruiser. Why? They were walking thru the neighborhood. Locals don't walk

In the aftermath of the shooting there was a swath of stories about other past stand your ground shootings in the news. Because it was white on white there was no major uproar or push to prosecute the white shooter. But as soon as the victim is black .....

Zimmerman went looking for trouble and an innocent young man is dead. Could Zimmerman avoided the confrontation? Yes. No crime was being committed. Zimmerman's life was not in danger. The cops was on their way.

Were the prosecutors being racist by not filing charges in the beginning. No. According to the stand your ground law the fact that Zimmerman provoked the confrontation was irrelevant. Blame the legislators, not the cops.

Do I think that Zimmerman should be punished? Yes.

Do I think that he will? Probably not. It seems to fall into typical stand your ground scenario.

MrsPratchett - There are parts of the US where a black man can get beaten up and killed for dating a white woman so no one is seriously asserting that some Americans are not racist.

However, look at the black faces on the US Supreme Court. How about the pols. Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell but to name a few. Then there is of course Obama. Now look at the UK. Forget about PM, how many cabinet members are non white? How many MPs, judges, senior military officers and cops are non-white?

Take a hard look and then come back and tell us that Americans are more racist than Brits.

I find the whole of American politics fascinating. Hilary Clinton, in theory was set up to win the nominations etc. She didn't. When interviewed and polled it wasn't that Obama was the best candidate, it was that Americans would still rather have a man than a woman, and if that meant a black man, so be it.
So yes, racism is still endemic there. Just as it is here.

Bit of a simplistic analysis Dawn.

A black president presiding over an economy still in the doldrums and with unemployment at historic highs still managed to comfortably beat a rich white guy. But don't let that get in the way of your prejudices.

As for Hillary, she crushed her white male opponents to become the front runner for the Democrat nomination. Then Obama came along.

So much for your argument that people voted for Obama because they disliked the idea of a woman getting the nomination more than the idea of a black man getting the nomination.

I'll bow out. I popped in for interesting conversation, not to be banged over the head and told I'm thick. I'm not.

Yeah, ded fick me. Univerestiyty lecherer is wot i do for a living.
I did say that polls demonstrated, actually, people polled, you know, people asked who and why. That would in most cases count as some sort of evidence based research, and in fact had I been bothered to put up said polls would have counted as empirical evidence, as it happens, cant be arsed with rude numpties.
I have no intention of being bullied in my own home by somebody uninvited.

As Forrest Gump said, stupid is as stupid does.

As a lecturer you should know that polling results can be skewed depending on who you ask and how you ask the questions.

The bottom line is that she beat a bunch of white guys to become a US Senator. She then beat a bunch of other white guys to become the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party. Faced with this evidence it's kind of silly to go - but a bunch of senior citizens in Boise, Idaho said that they would rather vote for a than a Liberal Feminista- and then projecting this sexist attitude onto all Americans.

Creighton - 50 years after the Civil Rights movement America has a black president, a number of black Supreme Court justices, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and a former National Security Adviser etc etc.

But hey ho, black people have only been in the UK for 70 years and that is why they are no black people in the establishment. Sounds like a reasonable argument

Anyone who saw Obama in 2004 at the DNC could see that he was going to be the Democratic candidate and probably President. He oozed charisma. He was also 14 years younger than Clinton, and without her baggage .

habbadabbadoo, i said that black people have been in america for 500 years, only in the last 50 years have they had any recognition, are you boasting about that? they had to wait 450 years, you think that is good? black people BUILT america but only have had recognition for 50 years, you are happy with that?

they had to put up with slavery, lynchings, robbery, ignorance and god knows what else for 450 years before being allowed to stand for office. good grief woman!

when obama stood for nomination he was the 'romantic' candidate, it would allow the white people in america assuage a bit of their guilt about the exclusion of black people from public life in america. a second clinton would have been too much so obama got the gig. they are talking about her as a shoe in next time round if she wants the job especially as the republicans appear not to have any sane nominees

People often go on about there being a secret neocon society behind Dubaya Bush. I wonder if there is an anti neocon society behind Obama?

Think about it. He came out of nowhere and was given the prime time king making slot at the 2004 conference. It was as if some secret cabal selected this newbie and groomed him for the job. And it's creepy how all of this was predicted by the final two series of The West Wing. It was as if somebody took the Obama playbook and adapted it for TV.