Post-Verdict Media Coverage

[nomatter_nevermind]

What is beyond rational dispute is that it began with the three-part exchange

How is that beyond rational dispute?

[nomatter_nevermind]

I am very confident in comparing Zimmerman's statements with those of Lauer - neither had any way of knowing the content of the other unless there was some overarching conspiracy on the part of SPD.

I addressed this in an earlier post.

W-11 didn't give an SPD interview until 3/2/12. She and W-20 made written statements on 2/26/12, but they are brief and sketchy. They describe the sounds, but they have nothing about location or movement of the source of the sounds. (87/184,, 103/184)

In her interviews, I don't think she was asked if she had spoken to Zimmerman, or heard any second-hand stories about his recollections.

[Cylinder]

How is that beyond rational dispute?

We have Zimmerman's conversation with NEN describing the events as they happened, which seems to suggest no prior difficulties. The call ended and around 2:30 later the confrontation has begun per Lauer's 911 call. Both unknown to the other, Zimmerman and Lauer describe the same sequence of events occurring in the same area. At that spot we have physical evidence of the encounter. Both describe the three-part exchange, though Lauer has no identity information about the exchange. They could both be coincidentally wrong (actually one wrong and the other lying, I suppose) or they could both be playing a role in a larger conspiracy either promoted or overlooked by SPD. Maybe Wagner contacted Zimmerman not to take an identification photograph but rather to coordinate narratives. Of course, you've never promoted that theory, just to be very clear. I don't assign rational weight to either of those postulates.

Maybe Zimmerman left the incriminating part out. That's rational. But what do we fill in for the intervening action? Why wasn;t it detected or mentioned by Lauer or Jeantel? It's possible, IMO, but not rational to  try to fill in those kind of details.

[leftwig]

Earlier, it seemed more likely that TM would still be there when the police arrived.

Based on what?  According to GZ, TM was constantly on the move, going from Taffe's to the area of the T, moving in and out of sight.  IT appears GZ lost sight of him at least twice after spotting him by Taffe's.  I would think if GZ had any consideration in detaining TM or having a confrontation, it would have occurred at "now he's coming to check me out".

Again, its certainly not proof that GZ didn't attempt to detain TM later, but I think its evidence that detaining TM wasn't something he set out to do.  All of GZ's actions while on the call with NEN were about keeping an eye on TM, not confronting him. 

[SuzieTampa]

Seminole County reports it spent abot $91,000 on the GZ trial. This doesn't include costs incurred before the trial, nor does it include the cost's associated with Corey's office.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-costs-seminole-20130809,0,3999521.story

[SuzieTampa]

In the FL Capitol rotunda, a Miami artist known as Huong unveiled a mural showing GZ shooting TM in the head. Instead of TM's face, there's a mirror so that people can all imagine themselves as TM. Next to TM is MLK, with blood dripping from his head. I don't understand why this was allowed. Can anyone put up anything, no matter how incorrect and offensive?

http://www.wtsp.com/rss/article/329417/19/Murals-unveiled-at-FLCapitol-honoring-Trayvon-Martin?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wtsp%2Fpolitics+%28WTSP.com+10+News+Politics+and+Government%29

[nomatter_nevermind]

In the FL Capitol rotunda, a Miami artist known as Huong unveiled a mural showing GZ shooting TM in the head.

That's a painting, separate from the mural.

"The American Color Mural" contains illustrations of those who have fought for freedom and equality around the world, including Abraham Lincoln, Nelson Mandela and Rosa Parks.

The mural contains a lot of blank spaces and people are encouraged to write down their thoughts about the Trayvon Martin shooting and social issues.

The painting was displayed in the rotunda as part of the protest. The article doesn't say if the mural was displayed there also. The title implies multiple 'murals' were 'unveiled' at the 'capitol'.

[SuzieTampa]

Despite what the media reported, it looks like two separate paintings that are mural-sized.

[cashmere]

Well, art is a form of expression....  I am attracted to the murals (asthetically), yet recognize the inaccuracies of both. 

It is sad if such art is used to further alter what was proven via evidence in this case.    Especially as art can make such a big statement and be displayed for many, many more years than I will ever exist.  Now I am questioning other historical murals I have seen through the years depicting other historical "truths" in countries I have visited.

I am surprised that it is allowed to be displayed in the Rotunda, but, as a public space, perhaps anyone has the right to display anything, in protest.

[DebFrmHell]

I was looking over her web site and she does some beautiful work.  AritistHuong. org.  I keep wondering who commissioned her to do that mural. 

Motivated by her own life history, Huong has committed herself to communicate peace through art.

That mural seems at odds with what she is doing with her regular pieces.

[cashmere]

I also wanted to say that aesthetically I appreciate her art....  It sends a very powerful message.  Just sad that her message is not accurate.

[annoyedbeyond]

http://www.peacemural.org/page/war-pieces

IT's a lot like her stuff.

[cashmere]

It is... I think (from what I see), she is a champion for human suffering, and what a great cause!  I just thnk her interpretation is inaccurate....  in this case...

[jeanmarc8]

IANAL

The mural is an interesting example along the lines of Historical Revisionism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism_(negationism)

This case seem to have had ongoing revisions with people “cherry picking” the information for their own benefit. This case had deception (photo of a much younger person), denial (reasonableness/legality of GZ getting out of the truck), and distraction (bag of Skittles).  There also was relativization with GZ’s prior legal issues as compared to TM’s, and trivialization on the severity of GZ’s head injury. The gullibility of some groups has been well demonstrated in this case, or maybe just their refusal to accept facts not in accordance with their world view. 

This case developed a life of its own very early, and now seems to have created an entire population of issues and events that seem to have little to do with facts from the case or even reasonable associations.

The jury did not find GZ guilty of any charges, based on the facts presentable in a court of law. Hopefully, that will remain fairly clear in all the fog that this case has generated. 

Again, IANAL.

[SuzieTampa]

I enjoy history, and it's amazing how many stories have important "facts" wrong.