Trigger-happy Neighborhood Watch Kills Black Teenager

Status
Not open for further replies.

FabricatedParadise

Can be bribed with circus peanuts
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
2,485
Reaction score
1,267
Location
In a house with lots of books
Can you share the talk your parents gave you?

Has anyone else on this board had a 'what not to do to get in trouble with black people' conversation with their parents?

How does that conversation sound like?

Alright, that probably wasn't the best way to phrase it. "How not to get in trouble with black people" meant "How to avoid offending someone". I didn't mean anything negative by it. It just meant I was taught from a young age not to say anything that could offend black people. We have a higher than the national average percentage of black people in my city and are from what I've come to realize, fairly more integrated than a lot of areas. So the concern here is less racism and more fear of racism.

I'm not saying there aren't racists here. Just that I don't think it's as prevalent as in other... less integrated, areas.

Growing up I did get semi-frequent reminders not to say anything that might be misconstrued. Mostly, how not to be mistaken for a racist, of ANY race. But it was more or less a general tolerance of differences that my mother was teaching me.

Kids tend to just blurt out the first thing that comes to mind and I definitely did a lot of that.

Please don't take my other post wrong. I was in no way saying that being mistaken for a racist is in any way comparable to being the victim of racism. I was just saying that some of us who are not "anti-black" get pegged with that title anyway, sometimes despite their best efforts.

I apologize if it came off the wrong way.
 

BunnyMaz

Ruining your porn since 1984
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
2,295
Reaction score
412
Age
40
I myself have been accused of it several times, and I know I've stated at least once in these forums that my father-in-law is half black. And one of my two closest friends of 12 years is a black man who I honestly think of as a brother (I mean sibling, not "brothah"). But there are many situations where I feel like I have to walk on egg shells because you never know how someone might take something you say.

For instance, just recently, I was out to dinner with my sister-in-law (who is half Latino and a quarter black) and her very white, ginger fiancé. I tuned out of the conversation for a minute and when I tuned back in, they were discussing what constitutes racism and whether or not the fiancé was racist and I physically cringed because at the table next to us we're three youngish black women who were now paying very close attention to us. I was immediately self conscious because for some reason I didn't feel like my sis-in-law looked "black" enough for anyone to realize they were joking.

FP, I know you don't mean it that way, but "I have a black relative/friend/coworker" is not a defence against racism.

I think it's important to understand, in general, that accusations of racism aren't always equivalent to an accusation of being a KKK-card-carrying, murdering, psychotic bigot. Everyone fucks up and does or says or thinks something racist once in a while. Even those of us who work hard to be mindful of our privilege and to combat internalised stereotypes. There's a difference between statements of "what you did/said" or "what you've internalised" and "what you are". I read an article somewhere online that put it brilliantly. I don't recall the exact wording, but it was something like

If you're walking around with your fly undone and your danglies flapping in the breeze for all to see, I'm going to tell you. I'm not doing it because I want to humiliate you or make you feel bad, I'm doing it because I'm your friend. I'm also not accusing you of flashing people or of being some sort of sexual deviant. If I really thought you were waving your dick around on purpose, I wouldn't bother telling you about it. I'd just do my best to keep far away from you, and ignore you unless you do something bad enough to warrant calling the police. No, I tell you because I assume you're a decent person who didn't intend to dangle their tackle about for all to see.
 

FabricatedParadise

Can be bribed with circus peanuts
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
2,485
Reaction score
1,267
Location
In a house with lots of books
FP, I know you don't mean it that way, but "I have a black relative/friend/coworker" is not a defence against racism.

I think it's important to understand, in general, that accusations of racism aren't always equivalent to an accusation of being a KKK-card-carrying, murdering, psychotic bigot. Everyone fucks up and does or says or thinks something racist once in a while. Even those of us who work hard to be mindful of our privilege and to combat internalised stereotypes. There's a difference between statements of "what you did/said" or "what you've internalised" and "what you are". I read an article somewhere online that put it brilliantly. I don't recall the exact wording, but it was something like

If you're walking around with your fly undone and your danglies flapping in the breeze for all to see, I'm going to tell you. I'm not doing it because I want to humiliate you or make you feel bad, I'm doing it because I'm your friend. I'm also not accusing you of flashing people or of being some sort of sexual deviant. If I really thought you were waving your dick around on purpose, I wouldn't bother telling you about it. I'd just do my best to keep far away from you, and ignore you unless you do something bad enough to warrant calling the police. No, I tell you because I assume you're a decent person who didn't intend to dangle their tackle about for all to see.

I can appreciate that, and I apologize if that's what it sounded like I was doing. The baby kept me up most of the night last night and I was obviously very tired this morning and not posting too clearly, not that it's an excuse. I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

Bottom line. This boy was murdered as an act of hate based on his race and that's all that matters here.
 

escritora

.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
2,995
Reaction score
616
Alright, that probably wasn't the best way to phrase it. "How not to get in trouble with black people" meant "How to avoid offending someone". I didn't mean anything negative by it. It just meant I was taught from a young age not to say anything that could offend black people. We have a higher than the national average percentage of black people in my city and are from what I've come to realize, fairly more integrated than a lot of areas. So the concern here is less racism and more fear of racism.

I'm not saying there aren't racists here. Just that I don't think it's as prevalent as in other... less integrated, areas.

Growing up I did get semi-frequent reminders not to say anything that might be misconstrued. Mostly, how not to be mistaken for a racist.

Kids tend to just blurt out the first thing that comes to mind and I definitely did a lot of that.

Please don't take my other post wrong. I was in no way saying that being mistaken for a racist is in any way comparable to being the victim of racism. I was just saying that some of us who are not "anti-black" get pegged with that title anyway, sometimes despite their best efforts.

I apologize if it came off the wrong way.

You didn't come off the wrong way. No worries.

I was just curious because I thought it was a "sit down" kind of conversation and that part fascinated me. But from what you wrote, it seems that the conversation came up when you misspoke.

Thanks for responding.
 

missesdash

You can't sit with us!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
6,858
Reaction score
1,092
Location
Paris, France
You didn't come off the wrong way. No worries.

I was just curious because I thought it was a "sit down" kind of conversation and that part fascinated me. But from what you wrote, it seems that the conversation came up when you misspoke.

Thanks for responding.

Kinda related: I remember reading, a year or two ago, a survey of parents in the US about how they spoke to their kids about race and how early on they explained it. A lot of white parents didn't think it was necessary or just hadn't thought to discuss it. This contrasted sharply with black parents who began explaining very early on that some people are this color and others are that color.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
I'm not exactly following the article. What is the point of contention with the Trayvon Smith coverage?

Oh good. I thought it was just me who didn't see what one thing had to do with the other.

More to the point, with Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee, Jr., temporarily suspending himself, the Miami Herald found the cops made some curious calls in their "investigation."

• As evidence that the incident was not a case of racial profiling, Lee told The Miami Herald that when the police dispatch operator asked Zimmerman the race of the suspicious person he saw, the Hispanic neighborhood watch captain did not know. Yet when the recording of that conversation was made public, Zimmerman clearly says, “he looks black.”

Initial police reports never mentioned that Zimmerman had a bloody nose or a wet shirt that showed evidence of a struggle. Attorneys for the dead teen’s family believe the information was added in a second report to justify the lack of an arrest.

• Police said witness statements supported Zimmerman’s account. But several of the witnesses expressed surprise, telling The Herald that they reported hearing someone crying for help just before a shot ended the cries. The 911 tapes of witness calls bolstered their claims.

• One of the witnesses who heard the crying said she called a detective repeatedly, but said he was not interested because her account differed from Zimmerman’s.

• For nearly a month, police never noticed a profanity Zimmerman mumbled under his breath when he called police, which some people believe was accompanied by a muffled racial slur.

• Even though investigators have the dead boy’s cell phone, it was Trayvon’s father who combed through the phone records to discover that his son was talking to a girlfriend in the moments that led up to his death. Police never contacted the girl, who told lawyers that Trayvon was alarmed because he was being followed.

“I have never seen such an incompetent investigation,
” said Walt Zalisko, a former Jersey City police commander who now owns a police management consulting company in Central Florida. “There are so many problems with this case. The problem up here is that officers receive very little training, and there is very little understanding of diversity issues.

“The good ol’ boy network is so prevalent here.”

There is an assumption that we've left the days of Bull Connor and the paunchy redneck cops of In the Heat of the Night long behind us. Now everyone is so much more enlightened and bias-free as crimes are doggedly investigated with CSI-style technology and justice will be pursued no matter where it leads or whom it discomforts.

It's a damn lie.

Progress has been made, but not nearly enough as some would like to believe. The color of the skin of the victim and the suspect still matters. Trayvon Martin was Black and George Zimmerman appeared to be White though he self-identifies as Hispanic. It was his version of events that swiftly became the Official Story

At best the Sanford P.D. were lazy in their "investigation." At worse, they dragged their feet, attempted to "correct" witnesses and behaved more like Inspector Clouseau than Joe Friday.

Cops deserve the support of the public when they do their jobs right. When they do their jobs wrong, the guilty go free and unpunished while the victims are buried and mourned. That's when they deserve to be scrutinized critically and when necessary, called to account as they have in this case.

Even now, The thin blue line too often only sees tragedies such as the killing of Trayvon Martin in stark terms of black and white.
 

Belle_91

With her nose stuck in a book
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
682
Location
Tennessee
I also read that they didn't perform a drug or alchol test on Zimmermen, and apparently they typically do that with most other murders. They did perform one on Martin.

That was messed up as well. He have witnesses saying he shot the poor kid, and literally nothing was done. He should have been arrested, but they didn't even test him for anything, but they did test Martin.


This is such a sad case, and I hope heads will roll like Don said.
 

cherita

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
642
Reaction score
131
I'm not exactly following the article. What is the point of contention with the Trayvon Smith coverage?

I haven't gotten through the whole article yet, but it's written by a Fellow for The Cato Institute, which is one of the top conservative think tanks. I'm sure that has something to do with whatever their point of contention is.
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
I'm not exactly following the article. What is the point of contention with the Trayvon Smith coverage?

That people make judgments about the general state of things based on perceived frequency of different kinds of events and that the coverage reflects such a perception.

In the case of Daisy, he seems to have intentionally presented things to ramp up that perceived frequency, even if it wasn't consistent with actual evidence. In the case of the coverage on the Trayvon Smith case, prior to it breaking as a controversy (look at the dates), the idea is that perceived frequency--and therefore significance--drove the level of coverage.

It's really not saying what should be, only arguing--philosophically--that there an ideal, somewhere.

As I said, interesting. Imo.
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
I think it was supposed to be that because of extensive media coverage, we think it happens a lot more often than it does? Maybe?
No, not at all by my reading. It can just as easily lead the other way: minimal coverage (like on Fox) can lead people to believe it's a very rare thing, when it's not.
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,140
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
No, not at all by my reading. It can just as easily lead the other way: minimal coverage (like on Fox) can lead people to believe it's a very rare thing, when it's not.

True. The most common way to mislead people is to be selective in reporting. The second most common is to shift or alter the emphasis in a story. Bald faced lies used to come a distant third.
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
At best the Sanford P.D. were lazy in their "investigation." At worse, they dragged their feet, attempted to "correct" witnesses and behaved more like Inspector Clouseau than Joe Friday.
I think you're being generous. I think Zimmerman was well-known to the force, which unofficially shared many of his viewpoints, and they actively impeded the investigation in the hopes they could protect him. Given the tale of the officer's son who wasn't arrested for a month after cold-cocking a homeless black man on video*, I don't think this is likely to have been a case of laziness or incompetence. I think that's too kind an interpretation by far.

---------------
*He was never arrested, actually. He finally turned himself in, perhaps from guilt or because the handwriting was on the wall. He ended up with a misdemeanor and a year's probation for what is obviously a gratuitous act of wanton violence.
 

Fins Left

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
439
Reaction score
32
I haven't gotten through the whole article yet, but it's written by a Fellow for The Cato Institute, which is one of the top conservative think tanks. I'm sure that has something to do with whatever their point of contention is.

from the article:
Our natural tendency to extrapolate from the subset we're exposed to means we can wind up with wildly inaccurate views of the world as a whole, even when all the stories we hear are true.

CATO (currently in a legal battle to prevent majority Koch brother ownership and who's board is packed with Koch brother shills) is laying the ground workd for NRA push back against this event in order to keep their FL Law and to push back against gun control. Look for Fox News to cite this article and get it out into the conversation.
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
The entire "stand your ground law" stuff is something of a red herring, imo. It's not applicable here at all, but was used by a less-than-capable police force as a means of excusing criminal behavior.
 

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
That people make judgments about the general state of things based on perceived frequency of different kinds of events and that the coverage reflects such a perception.

In the case of Daisy, he seems to have intentionally presented things to ramp up that perceived frequency, even if it wasn't consistent with actual evidence. In the case of the coverage on the Trayvon Smith case, prior to it breaking as a controversy (look at the dates), the idea is that perceived frequency--and therefore significance--drove the level of coverage.

It's really not saying what should be, only arguing--philosophically--that there an ideal, somewhere.

As I said, interesting. Imo.

I. . . still. . . don't follow the article.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
That people make judgments about the general state of things based on perceived frequency of different kinds of events and that the coverage reflects such a perception.

In the case of Daisy, he seems to have intentionally presented things to ramp up that perceived frequency, even if it wasn't consistent with actual evidence. In the case of the coverage on the Trayvon Smith case, prior to it breaking as a controversy (look at the dates), the idea is that perceived frequency--and therefore significance--drove the level of coverage.

It's really not saying what should be, only arguing--philosophically--that there an ideal, somewhere.

As I said, interesting. Imo.
The idea the Fox only mentioned the case once is amazing.

But I wonder about those stats. Are they counting the cable shows, or just "news." I know Rachael Maddow covered it every day, and I'm willing to bet Mathews, Schultz, O'Donnell, etc. did as well. I'd guess the 13 mentions by MSNBC is skewed low.

Was it on O'Reilly or Hannity?

And if Anderson Cooper et al are considered "news" as opposed to talk, you'd see CNN with a large discrepancy in coverage. I understand his point, but I do wonder about the stats he's basing it on.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
The entire "stand your ground law" stuff is something of a red herring, imo. It's not applicable here at all, but was used by a less-than-capable police force as a means of excusing criminal behavior.
Not really. The intent of the stand your ground law may be one thing, but the practical implementation is another.

Here's a scenario:

A neighborhood watch person, aware of burglaries in a neighborhood, begins following a person he deems suspicions. He confronts the person, asking him what he's doing in the neighborhood. The person he has confronted turns on him and attacks him, at which point, fearing for his safety and perhaps his life, he shoots and kills the man.

Under Florida law, that seems to be acceptable.

And if there are no witnesses to the event, how are you going to prove his account untrue? What if the victim of the shooting is larger than the shooter? What if he claims the victim picked up a rock? There's a gray area in this law large enough to drive a truck through, to mix metaphors.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
This just in:

Florida Gov. Rick Scott and Attorney General Pam Bondi today appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, removing the state attorney who had been considering the case, they announced tonight.

Scott and Bondi appointed State Attorney Angela B. Corey, whose office handles cases in Duval, Clay and Nassau counties.

Brevard-Seminole State Attorney Norm Wolfinger relinquished the investigation after a talk today with Scott and Bondi, according to a statement from the governor's office. The substance of the conversation was not disclosed.

It's unclear whether a grand jury that was scheduled to meet April 10

Pat Whitaker chief of operations in the State Attorney's Office in Seminole County, said it's possible the special prosecutor will still bring the case before the grand jury.

"That's up to her [Corey]," Whitaker said. "We have one [grand jury] summoned."
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
At best the Sanford P.D. were lazy in their "investigation." At worse, they dragged their feet, attempted to "correct" witnesses and behaved more like Inspector Clouseau than Joe Friday.
We don't have all the facts yet. But as someone who has worked on homicide cases (though never in charge of them), from what I see this is not just sloppy or lazy. It's incompetent in the extreme, actually incomprehensible to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.