07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 112113114115116 ...
tools
  1. Aquila's Avatar
    Are they criminals if they weren't convicted?

    I, for one, am glad we don't convict people based on popular vote.

    Posted via Android Central App
    Interesting distinction. Assuredly they are not convicts if not convicted, nor felons... but I suppose it depends on if criminal means you are convicted of a crime or if you committed a crime. A person who steals is a thief, regardless of whether they are caught or convicted.

    I agree with the no-mob-rule sentiment.
    07-18-2013 11:26 PM
  2. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Interesting distinction. Assuredly they are not convicts if not convicted, nor felons... but I suppose it depends on if criminal means you are convicted of a crime or if you committed a crime. A person who steals is a thief, regardless of whether they are caught or convicted.

    I agree with the no-mob-rule sentiment.
    We are discussing how this applies with regards to the legal system, correct? Conviction is what would then make you a criminal. Otherwise, we'd all be criminals. Nobody obeys every law 100% of the time.

    If we consider everyone to be a criminal who commits a crime, but is either never caught or never convicted, then we'd all be considered criminals, and would therefor be "letting criminals walk amongst us" committing those crimes again.
    Aquila likes this.
    07-18-2013 11:37 PM
  3. Aquila's Avatar
    We are discussing how this applies with regards to the legal system, correct? Conviction is what would then make you a criminal. Otherwise, we'd all be criminals. Nobody obeys every law 100% of the time.

    If we consider everyone to be a criminal who commits a crime, but is either never caught or never convicted, then we'd all be considered criminals, and would therefor be "letting criminals walk amongst us" committing those crimes again.
    Yes, the legal system should not consider anyone not convicted to be a criminal, but the lack of conviction might not be necessary for the public or a member of the public to consider them a criminal. Very good point about not everyone obeys every law... it's either fully or nearly impossible to do so, which is a good indication that we have too many laws, regulations, statutes codes, etc.
    07-18-2013 11:48 PM
  4. GadgetGator's Avatar
    Isn't there a saying somewhere... "One has no right to complain unless they have a better way"?

    Ridiculous. You don't have to have a solution to a problem to realize that there IS a problem. I've barely started thinking about this. Sadly I am only now realizing how biased our legal system is and society in general is. Racism, sadly, still exist.

    Are they criminals if they weren't convicted?

    I, for one, am glad we don't convict people based on popular vote.
    Legally no. But prior to his current incarceration, were there really that many people who thought that O.J. wasn't a criminal? Does a large part of society, even the Zimmerman trial jurors think that Zimmerman played a part in things going downhill that night? Yes. They do. That's a problem. And I am not suggesting a popular vote. But to stay the course and do nothing and think the system is fine, well, that isn't the solution either because our legal system clearly is NOT fine. It seems unable to deal in cases like this where things are a bit grayer. Not every situation is an absolute. There needs to be better ways of dealing with the realities of life.

    If the law does not agree that they committed a crime, why should 'most people' get to say otherwise? In order for someone to be called a criminal, they would actually have to be convicted of a crime. People don't just get to make that call based on their own bias.
    Ironic statement considering that entire night of the incident was based on someone's own bias. And while we haven't heard from the other jurors, it's pretty clear that for B37 there was some bias involved as well. So what people seem to be saying, is that the general public's bias isn't okay, but give it the seal of approval in a courtroom, and we're all good. I fundamentally disagree with that.
    DS1331 and kleeno like this.
    07-19-2013 02:54 PM
  5. jdbii's Avatar
    The problem is that there really are like 4 or 5 (or more) parallel discussions going on simultaneously. Somebody might make a point regarding evidentiary requirements within criminal legal due process, and the reply might be addressing racial inequality and the disadvantages minorities have both within the courts and society in general.

    I find myself more or less in agreement with most of gadgetgator's points but not when it comes to watering down Due Process in either criminal law or criminal procedure. With the War on Terror for the last 10 plus years, so much of Due Process has already been watered down (IMHO). As such, I would be really opposed to lowering standards to convict people for crimes, but I would be open to necessary reform to address racial injustices within the judicial system.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    07-19-2013 04:18 PM
  6. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Someone care to point out credible evidence of racial injustice in this case? Everything I've heard points to the opposite, especially the FBI's interviews with 30 witnesses that found no evidence of it. Yeah, there was the 911 call that he referred to Trayvon as black that was doctored to make it look like he was profiling, but he only said that because he was answering a direct question from the operator. He was asked if the "suspect" was white, black, or hispanic.

    Unless you were in the courtroom and watched the entire trial, I don't think anyone has much room to complain one way or the other about the verdict. What we've heard on nightly news reports and such don't cover everything, so there's no way we would have enough info to judge the trial ourselves.
    07-19-2013 04:42 PM
  7. JHBThree's Avatar
    Someone care to point out credible evidence of racial injustice in this case? Everything I've heard points to the opposite, especially the FBI's interviews with 30 witnesses that found no evidence of it. Yeah, there was the 911 call that he referred to Trayvon as black that was doctored to make it look like he was profiling, but he only said that because he was answering a direct question from the operator. He was asked if the "suspect" was white, black, or hispanic.

    Unless you were in the courtroom and watched the entire trial, I don't think anyone has much room to complain one way or the other about the verdict. What we've heard on nightly news reports and such don't cover everything, so there's no way we would have enough info to judge the trial ourselves.
    There isn't any. I keep hearing that bandied about, but there is no evidence that it was race based.
    07-19-2013 05:41 PM
  8. JHBThree's Avatar
    Ridiculous. You don't have to have a solution to a problem to realize that there IS a problem. I've barely started thinking about this. Sadly I am only now realizing how biased our legal system is and society in general is. Racism, sadly, still exist.



    Legally no. But prior to his current incarceration, were there really that many people who thought that O.J. wasn't a criminal? Does a large part of society, even the Zimmerman trial jurors think that Zimmerman played a part in things going downhill that night? Yes. They do. That's a problem. And I am not suggesting a popular vote. But to stay the course and do nothing and think the system is fine, well, that isn't the solution either because our legal system clearly is NOT fine. It seems unable to deal in cases like this where things are a bit grayer. Not every situation is an absolute. There needs to be better ways of dealing with the realities of life.



    Ironic statement considering that entire night of the incident was based on someone's own bias. And while we haven't heard from the other jurors, it's pretty clear that for B37 there was some bias involved as well. So what people seem to be saying, is that the general public's bias isn't okay, but give it the seal of approval in a courtroom, and we're all good. I fundamentally disagree with that.
    Point me to anywhere in any evidence that he targeted Trayvon because he was black.
    07-19-2013 05:42 PM
  9. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Ridiculous. You don't have to have a solution to a problem to realize that there IS a problem. I've barely started thinking about this. Sadly I am only now realizing how biased our legal system is and society in general is. Racism, sadly, still exist.



    Legally no. But prior to his current incarceration, were there really that many people who thought that O.J. wasn't a criminal? Does a large part of society, even the Zimmerman trial jurors think that Zimmerman played a part in things going downhill that night? Yes. They do. That's a problem. And I am not suggesting a popular vote. But to stay the course and do nothing and think the system is fine, well, that isn't the solution either because our legal system clearly is NOT fine. It seems unable to deal in cases like this where things are a bit grayer. Not every situation is an absolute. There needs to be better ways of dealing with the realities of life.



    Ironic statement considering that entire night of the incident was based on someone's own bias. And while we haven't heard from the other jurors, it's pretty clear that for B37 there was some bias involved as well. So what people seem to be saying, is that the general public's bias isn't okay, but give it the seal of approval in a courtroom, and we're all good. I fundamentally disagree with that.
    You do realize that the bias was toward "guilty" until they took emotion out of it, right? Looking at it from a purely legal standpoint they had no other choice but to go not guilty. It almost sounds like you want juries to just make a "gut call" and throw legality out of the window. That's not how our system works, and as was pointed out already, please provide evidence that race played a major role in the case, such that the verdict was affected by it.

    I'm not sure that our legal system can ever account for every gray area. That's why they're called gray areas. It implies that they are unable to be properly accounted for. Could you imagine if things got so bad that you had to run through a checklist of items before you thought it was ok to do something? Just so that you didn't run afoul of some law that was enacted to deal with a gray area?

    I'm also still wondering what your specific problem with the legal system (maybe court system specifically?) you have. Is it because you perceive there to be a racial problem, when the evidence shows that in this particular case one doesn't exist? I'm not saying it can't or doesn't exist at all, in any other system, but in this case, it wasn't a factor. What type of oversight would you want or suggest to deal with this? A panel to review judges decisions to make sure they were "fair"? Yeah, I quoted it, because our legal system already has a way to deal with decisions that you don't agree with.
    07-19-2013 05:48 PM
  10. jdbii's Avatar
    Point me to anywhere in any evidence that he targeted Trayvon because he was black.
    Didn't GZ have a history of calling the police about black people in the neighborhood more often than people of other skin color? Did GZ ever follow a white person in the same manner? Do you think he would have even followed TM if he had been white? These questions might be moot within the context of criminal liability, but they are "evidence" of race being a factor in the decisions GZ made that night.
    GadgetGator likes this.
    07-19-2013 06:15 PM
  11. llamabreath's Avatar
    Didn't GZ have a history of calling the police about black people in the neighborhood more often than people of other skin color? Did GZ ever follow a white person in the same manner? Do you think he would have even followed TM if he had been white? These questions might be moot within the context of criminal liability, but they are "evidence" of race being a factor in the decisions GZ made that night.
    Jurors are not allowed to know of a person's history.

    07-19-2013 06:27 PM
  12. jdbii's Avatar
    Jurors are not allowed to know of a person's history.

    Not always. There are exceptions like if one has a violent past or if they are a convicted felon or if "the door is opened." I wasn't speaking about criminal liability anyways and that is why I said my statements were moot as to the crime. I was just making a counter-point to JHBThree assertion that there was no evidence of race being a factor in what happened that night. When people alter their behavior based on the color of a person's skin that is racism.
    07-19-2013 06:36 PM
  13. CRS1's Avatar
    Not guilty!

    Trayvon got what he deserved.
    And no, I'm no racist. I have friends from all walks of life. Trayvon was a thug and got dealt with accordingly.


    Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
    07-19-2013 06:42 PM
  14. jdbii's Avatar
    Someone care to point out credible evidence of racial injustice in this case?
    GZ didn't spend one night in jail. If the situation had been reversed, and TM been white and GZ black, it is very likely that GZ would not have slept in his own bed that night. For many that is evidence of racial injustice. Not criminal liability for this case, but a double standard that whites and blacks are treated differently by the police.
    07-19-2013 06:52 PM
  15. llamabreath's Avatar
    GZ didn't spend one night in jail. If the situation had been reversed, and TM been white and GZ black, it is very likely that GZ would not have slept in his own bed that night. For many that is evidence of racial injustice. Not criminal liability for this case, but a double standard that whites and blacks are treated differently by the police.
    His skin is lighter, but he is not white, and I'm tired of people saying he is. THAT'S racial injustice... calling someone a different race than they actually are.

    jdbii likes this.
    07-19-2013 06:58 PM
  16. jdbii's Avatar
    His skin is lighter, but he is not white, and I'm tired of people saying he is. THAT'S racial injustice... calling someone a different race than they actually are.

    Good point and important distinction. Thank you. I should have said, if GZ hypothetically had been white.
    07-19-2013 07:01 PM
  17. llamabreath's Avatar
    You're welcome.

    And if everybody's going to go on hypotheticals, why not ask if both had been black?

    This would've just been your normal, routine, everyday black guy killing a black guy. Nothing new. Happens all the time.

    You never would've heard from Sharpton nor Jackson. No protests, no arguing, no big deal. Strange, huh? Because it's perfectly fine unless the killer has lighter skin.

    Great world.

    07-19-2013 07:28 PM
  18. nancybout's Avatar
    I find him guilty of at least manslaughter... I don't get why he's not guilty?
    If it was me walking, do you think he would've thought twice to bother me??
    I doubt it

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
    GadgetGator likes this.
    07-19-2013 07:51 PM
  19. nancybout's Avatar
    Oh and last. I'm positive there's some higher ups wanting a race war to take away guns and more rights or whatever...people have to unite so we can get ahead not fall into medias and their moguls mind frames.
    Its all insane

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
    07-19-2013 07:53 PM
  20. gollum18's Avatar
    Oh and last. I'm positive there's some higher ups wanting a race war to take away guns and more rights or whatever...people have to unite so we can get ahead not fall into medias and their moguls mind frames.
    Its all insane

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
    That sounds like a utopia. And utopian societies always end badly.

    Ie. Atlantis.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    07-19-2013 08:12 PM
  21. JHBThree's Avatar
    Didn't GZ have a history of calling the police about black people in the neighborhood more often than people of other skin color? Did GZ ever follow a white person in the same manner? Do you think he would have even followed TM if he had been white? These questions might be moot within the context of criminal liability, but they are "evidence" of race being a factor in the decisions GZ made that night.
    He did not have a history, no. There has been an ongoing investigation of him by the FBI, and they have found zero evidence that Zimmerman was racist.
    07-19-2013 09:56 PM
  22. JHBThree's Avatar
    Not always. There are exceptions like if one has a violent past or if they are a convicted felon or if "the door is opened." I wasn't speaking about criminal liability anyways and that is why I said my statements were moot as to the crime. I was just making a counter-point to JHBThree assertion that there was no evidence of race being a factor in what happened that night. When people alter their behavior based on the color of a person's skin that is racism.
    Except there ISN'T evidence, and in fact, there is evidence to the contrary.
    07-19-2013 09:58 PM
  23. JHBThree's Avatar
    GZ didn't spend one night in jail. If the situation had been reversed, and TM been white and GZ black, it is very likely that GZ would not have slept in his own bed that night. For many that is evidence of racial injustice. Not criminal liability for this case, but a double standard that whites and blacks are treated differently by the police.
    What do you want to bet that Jackson, Sharpton, et al. would have come to the defense of the hypothetical black Zimmerman and saying that whatever happened was because he was black? That's what I find so disingenuous about their accusations of racism. If the situation occurred exactly the same, from the incident to the acquittal, but Zimmerman was black, they would be screaming from the rooftops about how people wanted a conviction because they're racist.
    07-19-2013 10:02 PM
  24. MartyMcfly's Avatar
    Not guilty!

    Trayvon got what he deserved.
    And no, I'm no racist. I have friends from all walks of life. Trayvon was a thug and got dealt with accordingly.


    Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
    Zimmerman stalked a kid(really weird btw) and created a situation that could have been avoided. The kid was walking home. He wasn't breaking the law by any means. Zimmerman confronted the kid, more than likely got his **** handed to him, and being the coward that he is, he shot him. Zimmerman made a bad decision point blank. Saying someone deserves death (under this circumstance) is immature. Grow up kid.

    Exhibit B using Tapatalk
    07-19-2013 10:18 PM
  25. Jerry Hildenbrand's Avatar
    no personal attacks.
    no evasion of the word filter.

    this is the only warning I will give.
    07-19-2013 10:42 PM
4,617 ... 112113114115116 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD