Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[sgtbaker]

Maybe AlBell confused him with Johnny Karate or Travis or Lefty Seargent.

I don't think it's appropriate to call anyone out like that.

 

[RandFan]

Damn, I missed the bleeding head photo. Sometimes this thread moves so damn fast.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

You mean like laceration?

Reading from the post you quoted, it would appear he is confused and thinks that me referring to the word "confront" as loaded ("ambiguous"), in the context of that specific exchange, means I "objected" to the use of the word. I guess the fact that I used the word myself a few paragraphs later must have really confused him. Interesting how you were instantly able to grasp what I was saying though.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I don't think it's appropriate to call anyone out like that.

I'm not calling anyone out. I'm just saying maybe he confused them. I'm merely theorizing. Look, Al Bell's comments about RandFan were clearly meant to serve no purpose but to inflame and tweak, so I can't take them seriously. I prefer in such instances to have a laugh over them.

 

[Dan O.]

This is the first I have seen of the complete t-mobile bill Crump waved around at his 'connect the dots' press conference.

(transcript http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/20/cnr.03.html)

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf

Not sure if there is anything useful or not in there or not.

It would be difficult to ascribe any meaning to most of the calls listed in that bill since it is for a family plan covering 4 phones. That may help explained the 911 call we saw listed on an earlier snippet of that bill.

 

[sgtbaker]

Reading from the post you quoted, it would appear he is confused and thinks that me referring to the word "confront" as loaded ("ambiguous"), in the context of that specific exchange, means I "objected" to the use of the word. I guess the fact that I used the word myself a few paragraphs later must have really confused him. Interesting how you were instantly able to grasp what I was saying though.

It's a novel approach but I read the rest of your post.

 

[johnny karate]

Reading from the post you quoted, it would appear he is confused and thinks that me referring to the word "confront" as loaded ("ambiguous"), in the context of that specific exchange, means I "objected" to the use of the word. I guess the fact that I used the word myself a few paragraphs later must have really confused him. Interesting how you were instantly able to grasp what I was saying though.

Oh the irony of being called "confused" by someone who thinks "loaded" and "ambiguous" are synonymous terms. It is to laugh.

 

[curi0us]

This is the first I have seen of the complete t-mobile bill Crump waved around at his 'connect the dots' press conference.

(transcript http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/20/cnr.03.html)

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf

Not sure if there is anything useful or not in there or not.

Thanks for that.

The T-Mobile log says on page 5 "The date and time for all calls is Pacific Time."

If true/accurate that would put the 7:12 call really at 4:12. Seems weird, I'm probably missing something but thought I post what I noticed.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It would be difficult to ascribe any meaning to most of the calls listed in that bill since it is for a family plan covering 4 phones. That may help explained the 911 call we saw listed on an earlier snippet of that bill.

I don't know how the pages were printed, and some appear to be missing, etc. Some calls may apply to other phones the plan. I don't see what is there add up to even the 400 minutes it was claimed TM was on the phone with his GF. Also, the numbers have been edited out, as compared to http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ht_trayvon_martin_phone_call_dm_120320_main.jpg


AFAIK, TM phone was returned to Mr. Martin, locked. If Martin didn't have the password, that is likely him making a 911 call, that being the only call that can be made while locked.

I still am not clear as to why the cell phone was not kept as evidence. Is that a botch on the SPD ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Thanks for that.

The T-Mobile log says on page 5 "The date and time for all calls is Pacific Time."

If true/accurate that would put the 7:12 call really at 4:12. Seems weird, I'm probably missing something but thought I post what I noticed.

I missed that. IDK, maybe these pages from Mr. Martins t-mob account are less than useful....

 

[sgtbaker]

Oh the irony of being called "confused" by someone who thinks "loaded" and "ambiguous" are synonymous terms. It is to laugh.

Based on the use of more negative words like hostile and facing a problem, in the definition; at it's most basic, the word confront is a loaded term. However, me using the word confront without any follow up also makes it an ambiguous word, as in confronting someone without the intent of assaulting them. That was the whole point of NBS questioning my post.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Seems to me it comes down to awareness of the fact that language is very powerful and how we express things can have great meaning. I think the issue with the 911 operator is the best example of that.

1. "The police operator ordered GZ not to pursue". I find it fascinating how many things are communicated in that sentence. By using the word "police" it implies he was ordered by an authority, "ordered" of course is self-evident, and "pursued" suggests facts not in evidence.

2. "The 911 operator The non-emergency number operator advised GZ that he did not have to follow him."

Seems to me #1 is meant to do nothing but skew perceptions, while #2 is a much more objective representation of the facts. Of course I'm not claiming I haven't done any "skewing" myself, we all do it to different extents, sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally.

I fixed #2 - although we all keep typing it - GZ called the non-emergency number, not 911.

 

[oody]

You do realize that just because they are in the same building, that doesn't mean they're in the same cell, right?

Somewhere in between a youth sharing a cell with Bubba, and all youths being utterly isolated from the adult population, lies the truth. At risk of derailing, I'll point to this study and start a new thread if I feel compelled to say anything more on the subject...

In what appears IMO to be a reputable study prepared under a grant from the US Department of Justice: Juveniles in Adult Prisons and Jails: A National Assessment:

In 1988, 47 percent of juveniles in prisons (compared with 37 percent of youth in juvenile facilities) suffered violent victimization, including violence at the hands of staff. Sexual assault was five times more likely in prison, beatings by staff nearly twice as likely, and attacks with weapons were almost 50 percent more common in adult facilities. Clearly, safely housing juveniles in adult facilities and protecting younger inmates from predatory, older inmates are important issues for correctional administrators.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I've heard Crump himself make two different claims. I don't think it's fair that I ask you to take me on my word, since 5 pages ago, I blatantly made a conclusion based on something that was never said. If someone else remembers this, please back me up.

Nope, just the claim that she was too distraught to go.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Based on the use of more negative words like hostile and facing a problem, in the definition; at it's most basic, the word confront is a loaded term. However, me using the word confront without any follow up also makes it an ambiguous word, as in confronting someone without the intent of assaulting them. That was the whole point of NBS questioning my post.

I think for those who fault GZ for following, it would be fair to say 'provoked a confrontation'. But since the lead investigator doesn't even know ....

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So do you know who started the fight?
GILBREATH: Do I know?
O'MARA: Right.
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?
GILBREATH: No....
O'MARA: Ok. And in those statements that you're aware of and were part of your foundation for coming up with this probable cause affidavit, what did he tell the officers?
GILBREATH: That he was the victim in this, and that it was Martin that confronted him and assaulted him.

 

[sgtbaker]

Nope, just the claim that she was too distraught to go.

It was the day after the wake that she supposedly found out that she was the last one to speak to him and ended up in the hospital.

 

[curi0us]

It was the day after the wake that she supposedly found out that she was the last one to speak to him and ended up in the hospital.

Here is a story that says exactly that:
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/03/trayvon-martin-girlfriend-hospitalized-following-death

ETA: I haven't heard Crump himself give that version though.

 

[sgtbaker]

Here is a story that says exactly that:
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/03/trayvon-martin-girlfriend-hospitalized-following-death

ETA: I haven't heard Crump himself give that version though.

I just thought the original story said that she found out at the wake which flew in the face of her not being able to go to the wake. I didn't remember it accurately.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Here is a story that says exactly that:
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/03/trayvon-martin-girlfriend-hospitalized-following-death

ETA: I haven't heard Crump himself give that version though.

The day after his wake, Trayvon's family attorney, Benjamin Crump, who had been conducting his own extensive investigation because cops had determined the shooting was in self defense, told Trayvon's girlfriend she was the last person to talk to him," a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com

Well, that is contrary what Ben crump himself said at the press conference. Sounds like a poor anonymous source to me.

 

[AlBell]

Not only is this against forum rules but it is unfair to me and without basis.

Agreed. Sorry.

I'm surprised at no yellow card or worse ... yet.