The Murder of Trayvon Martin

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I guess you missed all of the misinformation and spin from previous incidents and trials. Misinformation and spin are most likely to occur for incidents that garner public attention, sensitivity, and outrage. Es lo mismo.



"All of the facts" are never presented. And people didn't wait for "all of the facts" before rushing to judgment in previous incidents and cases.

True but there is a big difference between judging a case based on evidence and testimony presented during a trial (Anthony) and judging a case based on half assed reporting (Martin).

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

True but there is a big difference between judging a case based on evidence and testimony presented during a trial (Anthony) and judging a case based on half assed reporting (Martin).

Are you pretending that people waited for evidence and testimony to judge Casey Anthony? Read the GC threads.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Are you pretending that people waited for evidence and testimony to judge Casey Anthony? Read the GC threads.

No, what I'm saying is the two cases are apples and oranges and really can't be compared to each other, including the rush to public judgment.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

No, what I'm saying is the two cases are apples and oranges and really can't be compared to each other, including the rush to public judgment.

LOL. The rush to judgment is the rush to judgment. Your response is exactly what I am talking about.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Why don't we stick to things like "facts" and "pure law" (if such a thing exists)? Wouldn't that be better than smashing our collective heads against the wall, and/or making ludicrous scenarios real via conjecture or misinformation?

This is GreekChat, not a Florida court of law. People go off uninformed everyday on this site about 100 different subjects. Nothing said here will impact the Zimmerman trial in any way, shape or form. It's a venue to express opinion, nothing more. Anyone foolish enough to take take information here w/out verifying it themselves, gets what they get.

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

True but there is a big difference between judging a case based on evidence and testimony presented during a trial (Anthony) and judging a case based on half assed reporting (Martin).

Are you suggeting no one had had anything to say about the Anthony case before it was decided?

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by TonyB06

Are you suggeting no one had had anything to say about the Anthony case before it was decided?

No, I'm saying that you can't compare the two cases at this point. There is no mystery regarding who killed Martin, the main question is whether orbit it was murder or self defense.

Having an opinion on Anthony's guilt or innocence post acquittal is totally different than having an opinion of Zimmermans guilt or innocence pre arrest.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

No, I'm saying that you can't compare the two cases at this point. There is no mystery regarding who killed Martin, the main question is whether orbit it was murder or self defense.


Having an opinion on Anthony's guilt or innocence post acquittal is totally different than having an opinion of Zimmermans guilt or innocence pre arrest.

True, the facts of the cases are obviously different, but the court of public opinion --cable television, blogs, websites, is always open. Comparisons of the climates which surround the two cases have yielded interesting commentary, IMO. That and other elements will have interest for some and not for others. Still, I do not understand this request to fall silent until the gavel falls.



Regarding Anthony's guilt post acquittal/ Zimmerman...

Ok, that's your opinion and you have the ability to analyze and answer/rebut/ignore those posts based on your POV. Anyone does. But others will see things that are interesting, and worthy of comment, to them.

I feel some kind of way about the fact that in some quarters' there is a belief that there's been an "oversaturation" of media coverage of the Martin/Zimmerman case. I don't think there was such talk when the subject was Natalie Holloway, or Casey Anthony, seemingly 24/7?

We are all more individualistic media consumers than we were a generation ago and that will be reflected in the social media contributions we make, GreekChat included.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TonyB06

This is GreekChat, not a Florida court of law. People go off uninformed everyday on this site about 100 different subjects. Nothing said here will impact the Zimmerman trial in any way, shape or form. It's a venue to express opinion, nothing more. Anyone foolish enough to take take information here w/out verifying it themselves, gets what they get.

When your opinion includes inventing or misinterpreting facts or just pure conjecture, there are going to be a lot of folks here who will have the opinion that you should probably not share yours.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by Kevin

When your opinion includes inventing or misinterpreting facts or just pure conjecture, there are going to be a lot of folks here who will have the opinion that you should probably not share yours.

Well, if they were of a mind to accept your assertion that their posts represented "inventing or misinterpreting facts or just pure conjecture" that could be the case for some...

Not me.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by TonyB06

Well, if they were of a mind to accept your assertion that their posts represented "inventing or misinterpreting facts or just pure conjecture" that could be the case for some...

Not me.

So there's been no conjecture in this thread? Nobody has relied on "facts" out of context or without checking their veracity?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

Having an opinion on Anthony's guilt or innocence pre-arrest and pre- and post- acquittal....

FYP.

Originally Posted by TonyB06

I feel some kind of way about the fact that in some quarters' there is a belief that there's been an "oversaturation" of media coverage of the Martin/Zimmerman case. I don't think there was such talk when the subject was Natalie Holloway, or Casey Anthony, seemingly 24/7?

That was brought up on GC (i.e., GCers hated Nancy Grace) and around the media world. But people who said "innocent until proven guilty," etc. were sometimes called meanies who have no compassion (and apparently the required anger) for a sweet little girl's tragic outcome.

Originally Posted by KSig RC

So there's been no conjecture in this thread? Nobody has relied on "facts" out of context or without checking their veracity?

There definitely has.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

There definitely has.

Up until the post in question, I didn't even think this was up for debate.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by TonyB06

This is GreekChat, not a Florida court of law. People go off uninformed everyday on this site about 100 different subjects. Nothing said here will impact the Zimmerman trial in any way, shape or form. It's a venue to express opinion, nothing more. Anyone foolish enough to take take information here w/out verifying it themselves, gets what they get.

I wish this were true, but unfortunately, it's not. Public discourse and pretrial publicity are proven to influence juries in all sorts of cases, but particularly in "pop-culture" cases. We may not directly influence jurors, but we're adding to the public discourse, and not in a positive manner.

Hold yourself to a higher standard - just because we pop off all the time with inane and uninformed opinions doesn't mean it's something we should do in this instance. There's a difference between a trial and Pinterest, a distinction that is apparently being lost on some.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I wish this were true, but unfortunately, it's not. Public discourse and pretrial publicity are proven to influence juries in all sorts of cases, but particularly in "pop-culture" cases. We may not directly influence jurors, but we're adding to the public discourse, and not in a positive manner.

Hold yourself to a higher standard - just because we pop off all the time with inane and uninformed opinions doesn't mean it's something we should do in this instance. There's a difference between a trial and Pinterest, a distinction that is apparently being lost on some.

And again, you continue to make the mistake the other poster makes -- that your opinions of what is "just and pure and right" should carry the day on what others post. They do not. Everyone can weigh and sift what they read and make a determination on what they accept. Your choices on what and when you add to the public discourse, and whether they are sufficiently positive are just that -- your choices. You do not get to make that choice for others.

I've appreciated and agreed with some of the points you've made upthread, and others I've disagreed with. Eh, that's how it goes in America.

You obviously have confidence in your ability to separate and weigh the information as presented. Perhaps you should have a bit more confidence in others' ability to do the same.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by SOM

And I agree with your second part-Why are we even having this conversation? All I did was post an article, as others have here, that seemed to have some interesting information on it about this case. If one really wanted to track down the evidence behind the story, one should contact the writer of the story directly.

It may be interesting information, but is it reliable information? And if it is not, what is the value in passing it along?

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I wish this were true, but unfortunately, it's not. Public discourse and pretrial publicity are proven to influence juries in all sorts of cases, but particularly in "pop-culture" cases. We may not directly influence jurors, but we're adding to the public discourse, and not in a positive manner.

Hold yourself to a higher standard - just because we pop off all the time with inane and uninformed opinions doesn't mean it's something we should do in this instance. There's a difference between a trial and Pinterest, a distinction that is apparently being lost on some.

Co-sign.