Author Topic: Verdict Reactions  (Read 25296 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #90 on: July 19, 2013, 12:46:13 PM »

San Bernardino Sun, 7/18/13
Quote
Hours after it began, a protest Thursday [7/17] resulted in bricks thrown at cars and 11 arrests related to civil disobedience, according to authorities.

. . .

Just before midnight, as police continued to respond to protest-related calls elsewhere in the city, a police vehicle left the northeast corner of Base Line and Waterman Avenue. Eleven protesters remained.

Andre Orr, 27, said police had asked the group to leave but they felt they had a right under the First Amendment to stay, even after he says police shot his cousin with a bean bag gun.

"He didn't do anything wrong," Orr said of his cousin, complaining about the time it took paramedics to arrive.

Orr acknowledged that he had seen some protesters throw bricks or rocks, which he said was incited by comments from people driving by. "Some (Latinos) drove by and were yelling at us, and you know how it is," Orr said.

. . .

 Police said the rock and bottle throwing started without provocation. People in the crowd began tossing rocks and bottles at passing motorists, police vehicles and police personnel.

A police car was damaged by a thrown rock, and a police horse was struck.

Police drove people away with horses and riot gear, Orr said, when they were there only to ask for justice.

Most of the protesters dispersed, but police say around 50 moved behind cinder block walls and started throwing rocks and bottles at officers. Police eventually cleared the remaining people out of the area.

Once the crowd had left, police received a report of a person who had been attacked by one of the protesters. The suspected attacker, 22-year-old Byron Thomas, was arrested after a long foot chase. Police said he was on parole.

NBC, 7/19/13
Quote
The San Bernardino Police Department was responding to reports of vandalism when they encountered about 120 protesters. The group began throwing rocks and bottles at passing motorists, police officers and patrol cars, according to a police department press release.

Aerial video showed dozens of demonstrators running from galloping police horses as officers demanded they disperse from the intersection of Baseline and Waterman avenues.

Most of the crowd left after the officers' orders, but about 50 people decided to move behind cinder block walls and throw rocks and bottles at officers, police said.

One patrol car was damaged by a rock that a protester threw at it, police said.

NewsChopper 4 spotted at least one person in handcuffs. Police arrested 11 people for a variety of charges including assault with a deadly weapon, battery, assault on a police horse and vandalism.

A Jack in the Box near Baseline and Waterman avenues closed 90 minutes early at 8:30 p.m. because demonstrators had started to congregate around the fast food restaurant.

Rocks were thrown at the business’ window, but there was no damage, an employee who spoke on the condition of anonymity said.

Officers cleared the business areas to prevent any additional vandalism, police said.

Offline txantimedia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #91 on: July 19, 2013, 12:52:00 PM »
Since there's a tips line, there's always hope.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #92 on: July 19, 2013, 01:23:57 PM »
Transcript of Obama remarks.  The only thing I found interesting was
Quote
On the other hand, if we're sending a message as a society in our communities that someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms, even if there's a way for them to exit from a situation, is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we'd like to see?

And for those who -- who resist that idea, that we should think about something like these Stand Your Ground laws, I just ask people to consider, if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman, who had followed him in a car, because he felt threatened? And if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, then it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.

Is he suggesting in the first quoted paragraph that Zimmerman caused the event by standing his ground and not retreating back to his car?  The second seems to ignore that Zimmerman, at the time he used deadly force, was facing a far greater threat than being followed by somebody in a car.  In general I approve of Mr. Obama, but I don't approve of these remarks.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #93 on: July 19, 2013, 09:44:40 PM »
Houston Chronicle, 7/17/13.

Oh, yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

 ::)

A Confederate Flag on the website?

With friends like that...

Except I don't see George ever being friends with folks like that.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #94 on: July 19, 2013, 10:25:52 PM »
No.

Then I haven't the foggiest notion what point you were making.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #95 on: July 19, 2013, 10:43:29 PM »
Then I haven't the foggiest notion what point you were making.

Not so much a point as a jest. It probably falls flat over cultural/regional differences.

I grew up in the South. The Confederate flag is like wallpaper to me. I don't see its display as 'worse' than the adventures in racial sensitivity of Robert Sr. and Jr.

ETA: I wanted to mention the pro-GZ demonstration because it's the only one I have heard of so far, except the handful at the courthouse during deliberations. I mentioned the Confederate flag because I felt it would be misleading to leave it out. It wasn't my intention to be inflammatory, but I suspect the whole sub-thread will be deleted.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2013, 10:49:21 PM by nomatter_nevermind »

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #96 on: July 19, 2013, 11:23:51 PM »
Not so much a point as a jest. It probably falls flat over cultural/regional differences.

I grew up in the South. The Confederate flag is like wallpaper to me. I don't see its display as 'worse' than the adventures in racial sensitivity of Robert Sr. and Jr.

ETA: I wanted to mention the pro-GZ demonstration because it's the only one I have heard of so far, except the handful at the courthouse during deliberations. I mentioned the Confederate flag because I felt it would be misleading to leave it out. It wasn't my intention to be inflammatory, but I suspect the whole sub-thread will be deleted.

Okay, I see where you were going with that now.

If they'd gone with the flag of the Republic of Texas, or a picture of the Alamo, I could see that as just a reflection of that stubborn Texas independence streak, but there can't be any way they don't know that the Stars and Bars are just a big ol' FU to black people in general and pretty close to saying "What happened was okay because Martin was black and George was close enough to white".

I hope they're going to have a lot of HPD present when demonstration meets counter-demonstration, because I suspect a lot more than a civil exchange of views and opinions is on tap.

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #97 on: July 20, 2013, 02:28:32 AM »
I don't see its display as 'worse' than the adventures in racial sensitivity of Robert Sr. and Jr.

Yeah, I remember when you were making a big deal about Robert Sr. accusing some black leaders of racism. You figured the state was just waiting to pounce on that in cross-examination. What a joke.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #98 on: July 20, 2013, 05:17:14 AM »
Yeah, I remember when you were making a big deal about Robert Sr. accusing some black leaders of racism. You figured the state was just waiting to pounce on that in cross-examination. What a joke.

I was wrong. Not for the last time, I'm sure.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #99 on: July 20, 2013, 06:14:33 AM »
Local 10 Miami, 7/19/13

Quote
As Florida faces backlash over its "Stand Your Ground" law following the verdict in the George Zimmerman trial, Gov. Rick Scott said Friday [7/19] the law is fine just the way it is.

"We put together a 19 person, bipartisan taskforce and they reviewed it," said Scott. "I agree with them. We should not be changing and I don't support us changing Stand Your Ground."

Late Thursday [7/18], Scott met with some of the protesters who have occupied the capitol for several days. He said he wouldn't call the special session they want on Stand Your Ground.

"I met with these students yesterday up in Tallahassee and here's what I told them: call your legislator, call your house member, call your senator," said Scott. "That's the way the process works in our state, but I believe in our existing Stand Your Ground law."

I recall a similar story shortly after the verdict was announced. Governor Scot met with some protesters, told them a task force had reviewed SYG and he stood by its findings. I meant to post on it then, but it got lost among other matters.

Offline ding7777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Rate Post +19/-59
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #100 on: July 20, 2013, 08:39:27 AM »

I recall a similar story shortly after the verdict was announced. Governor Scot met with some protesters, told them a task force had reviewed SYG and he stood by its findings. I meant to post on it then, but it got lost among other matters.

Final Task Force Report

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #101 on: July 20, 2013, 12:00:46 PM »
I was wrong. Not for the last time, I'm sure.

I probably should have been less sarcastic, but I was frankly annoyed by the snideness of the comment I replied to and your (apparently deleted) 10:22:03 PM comment. My point wasn't that you were wrong; it was that you seem to have an unreasonable standard for what constitutes racial insensitivity. I'm amazed anyone could believe questioning Al Sharpton's racial attitudes is such a serious indication of racial bias that it could be used to impeach Robert Sr.'s testimony.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #102 on: July 20, 2013, 04:17:44 PM »
Christian Science Monitor, 7/20/13

Quote
A day after President Obama said it was Americans – not politicians – who must launch any “conversation” about gun violence, thousands of people in hundreds of locations began doing just that.

. . .

Civil rights leader and MSNBC host Al Sharpton organized the ‘‘Justice for Trayvon’’ rallies and vigils outside federal buildings in at least 101 cities: from New York and Los Angeles to Wichita, Kan., and Atlanta, where people stood in the rain at the base of the federal courthouse, with traffic blocked on surrounding downtown streets.

. . .

By mid-afternoon Saturday [7/20], rallies had remained peaceful, although law enforcement officials had prepared for confrontations. Following Zimmerman’s acquittal a week ago, there had been some vandalism and property damage in Oakland and Los Angeles. Nine people were arrested in Oakland, 14 in Los Angeles.

Offline Lousy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Rate Post +6/-30
  • Fetch my hammer
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #103 on: July 20, 2013, 05:59:18 PM »
Who are they 'conversing' with?

Offline SuzieTampa

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Verdict Reactions
« Reply #104 on: July 20, 2013, 08:23:28 PM »
Maybe The Ministry of Information has requested media not to report riots as such?

In the late 80s, when there were some riots in Tampa and St. Petersburg, some liberals said it was racist to use that word and suggested the media use "rebellions" instead. We went with "disturbances."

 

Site Meter
click
tracking