Image 01 Image 03

Inconvenient narratives in the Martin case

Inconvenient narratives in the Martin case

Via The Crawdad Hole, a very interesting chart of FBI crime statistics for 2009.

What it shows is that whites kill whites, and blacks kill blacks.  And interestingly, “other” kills “other.”

It’s not the narrative heard much in the media, because it does not play into stereotypes as to violence.

They don’t have statistics on murders by political affiliation, but the media is on a never-ending search for Tea Party murderers.

How do we know George Zimmerman was not a Tea Party supporter? We would have heard about it instantaneously had it been the case. Same if he was a Republican.

And that is the narrative, Republican/Tea Party/Right-wing talk radio caused Zimmerman to stereotype Martin:

Turns out Zimmerman is a Democrat:

The individual at the center of the controversial Trayvon Martin shooting is a registered Democrat.

George Michael Zimmerman, born Oct. 5, 1983, Voter ID #107862946, registered as a Democrat in Seminole County, Fla., in August 2002, according to state voter registration documents.

It is unclear whether he voted for President Barack Obama in 2008.

He’s also listed on his voting record as “Hispanic” not “white Hispanic.”

BuzzFeed Politics is treating the revelation that Zimmerman was a registered Democrat with scorn, but I doubt they would have reacted that way if it turned out Zimmerman was a Tea Party supporter.

Be prepared for outrage! that someone mentioned that Zimmerman was who he was.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


They are both Obama’s “sons.” It was a family feud and they had the audacity to involve innocent bystanders in their dysfunctional narrative.

    Rickart in reply to n.n. | March 27, 2012 at 9:01 pm

    That FBI chart is also a disgrace because it purposely lists “Hispanics/Latinos” in with “Whites”, something the feds have been doing recently.

    So Zimmerman and Hugo Chavez (not to conflate the two) would both be listed as “White”.

    The violent crime ratio throughout the years in America for Black:Hispanic:White:Other is:

    5.0(Black):3.5(Hispanic):1.5(White):0.5(Others like Asians)

    Those numbers are actually even more disturbing when you consider the relative size of the Hispanic and Black populace in America in relation to White and Asian and Other.

    The Hispanic crime rates have been steadily ticking up over the past few decades. They also account for the vast majority of “White on Black” crime in your so-called “statistics” Mr. Jacobson.

    i.e. I seriously doubt you can credibly claim that the race-war in Los Angeles between Hispanic and Black gangs is between actual “Whites” and Blacks – although you certainly try to in this posted chart of your’s.

      Aggie95 in reply to Rickart. | March 27, 2012 at 11:20 pm

      LOL… The good professor had nothing to do with the chart and the reason why the hispanic crime stats are so light are because the feds roll all or most hispanic crime numbers into or under white and most use the government numbers and here is another little odd bit of information ….when a hispanic is the victim of a hate crime he is classified as hispanic but when a hispanic commits a hate crime he is classified as white

        Rickart in reply to Aggie95. | March 28, 2012 at 5:24 am

        He is responsible for the information he disseminates and passes along as “fact” – just like anyone else would be. His “professor” title matters not a whit; it does not absolve him of his culpability.

        If he publishes false or misleading information, then he is responsible for that false and misleading information – something a lot of journalists and bloggers try to get away with.

        That’s not just an obvious violation of ethics; that’s simply common sense (which you obviously lack Aggie95).

        Jacobson is publishing false and misleading information as fact in this post.

        And Americans of honest stature will hold him to account.

          Aggie95 in reply to Rickart. | March 28, 2012 at 8:50 am

          well he got it from obama’s Dept of Justice now didn’t he …. so how do you feel about obama lying to ya laddie

          Aggie95 in reply to Rickart. | March 28, 2012 at 8:52 am

          and as far as honest Americans holding him to account I certainly hope you are not including yourself in that group

Cowboy Curtis | March 27, 2012 at 2:12 pm

If anyone is interested, Tom Wolfe’s book The Bonfire of the Vanities seems awfully relevant to what’s going on. Including a character based on Reverend Al, back when his race hustling was confined to NYC. Personally, I like the movie a lot more, but to each his own, I guess.

    Speaking of “Reverend” Al, and New York, they will allow anyone to become a “civil rights” leader these days. The majority of American Jews have a very short or selective memory indeed.

    Estragon in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | March 27, 2012 at 11:54 pm

    Except that Sherman McCoy was engaged in illicit behavior when the accident happened, and made no report. George Zimmerman called the cops, remained at the scene, and answered all their questions there and at the station – even though he had suffered lacerations and a broken nose in the vicious assault by Martin – without an attorney. (Yes, McCoy eventually spoke to investigators without counsel, too, but boy oh boy did he ever learn the lesson:

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | March 28, 2012 at 12:26 am

    Yes, Tom Wolfe basically called the Duke Lacrosse case long before it happened in “Bonfire of the Vanities”, which makes this case now “Duke Lacrosse Redux”

Professor Why | March 27, 2012 at 2:13 pm

I had to force myself to watch that entire video clip… Wow, her ignorance is fully on display there! Too bad she decided to open her mouth without having all the FACTS, huh… 😉

LukeHandCool | March 27, 2012 at 2:21 pm

She probably said all this before it came out that Trayvon Martin had been found with jewelry and a screwdriver (burglary tool) in his backpack at school.

Ssshhhh …Liberal Approved Lynching In Progress ….. Do Not Disturb

    n.n in reply to Aggie95. | March 27, 2012 at 2:32 pm

    If we are ever disposable, then we are always disposable. Both Martin and Zimmerman will be replaced by others with similar incidental features — diversity or something.

and on that chart that was posted showing the murder rates ….keep in mind that hispanic murder numbers are rolled into the white crime numbers …if they are using government data and most of them do

    LukeHandCool in reply to Aggie95. | March 27, 2012 at 2:47 pm

    Exactly. A large part of the violence on blacks committed by non-blacks is by hispanic gangbangers. Here in L.A., not only with the gangs, but also with the prison population and the public secondary schools, there is a lot of tension and animosity between blacks and hispanics.

      Tamminator in reply to LukeHandCool. | March 27, 2012 at 4:16 pm

      I didn’t know you lived in L.A.
      I used to live in Studio City.

        LukeHandCool in reply to Tamminator. | March 27, 2012 at 5:05 pm

        I didn’t know you used to live in Studio City. 🙂

        I used to work in Studio City.

        I was waiting at a crosswalk on Ventura Blvd., waiting for the light to change one day when Ed Begley Jr. came up beside me, in flip flops, shorts and t-shirt, holding a couple bags of groceries.

        He started talking to me and I kept thinking “I’ve seen this guy before … did I go to school with him?”

        He was very friendly and then, as we were crossing the street … he invited me to come over to his house to see his solar panels, etc.

        Well, I thought that was a little weird, so I just smiled and said, “Yeah, maybe one day when I have some free time.”

        I told the boss what had happened and he said, “Oh, that was Ed Begley Jr. He lives on the next block.”

        Then I realized it wasn’t some weirdo trying to pick up on me. I should’ve visited … but I’m too shy.

        Gotta give him credit. He walks the walk … and from my experience, he’s a very friendly fellow.

          Tamminator in reply to LukeHandCool. | March 27, 2012 at 6:30 pm

          I used to live on Arch Drive off of Ventura. Used to see a lot of Begeley types at the bar “Residuals”. Lots of B actors used to hand out there. Check it out some time.

          I miss L.A….and the movie industry…and friends there…
          Too bad California has gone into the shitter.

          Where do you live?

          LukeHandCool in reply to LukeHandCool. | March 27, 2012 at 7:34 pm

          Santa Monica … where all the beautiful Hollywood leftists live.

          Like the couple a half-block away living in a $3 million+ house with the Lexus SUV parked in front … and an A.N.S.W.E.R. yard sign on their front lawn.

          Sorry Professor! Back to politics …

          Tamminator in reply to LukeHandCool. | March 27, 2012 at 8:45 pm

          Yeah, sorry Professor. Just chillin’ with the Lukemeister!
          Back to the drama.

The problem I see with using that chart to try to undercut the current outrage is that much of it comes from Zimmerman not being charged. Since that graph only shows homicides classified as murders, it wouldn’t apply to the current case.

    Milhouse in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 3:33 pm

    He wasn’t charged because there was no probable cause that he committed a crime. So the chart is very relevant.

      Awing1 in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 3:53 pm

      Why is a chart about race in murder relevant to complaints about racism in justifiable homicide cases, considering no cases of justifiable homicide would exist in those statistics, the two are mutually exclusive. Wouldn’t the appropriate chart be one about race and justifiable homicide?

        Milhouse in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 5:14 pm

        The chart gives the lie to the claim that there is some sort of “epidemic” of white people murdering black people.

          Awing1 in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 5:28 pm

          Who exactly is claiming that?

          Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 6:12 pm

          Jesse Jackson: “Blacks are under attack”.

          Oh, and white America is doing for BOTH fun and profit.

          Really. He said that.

          Awing1 in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 6:41 pm

          Rags, I meant to say what relevant people are saying that lol. Even that statement in context was talking about broader issues facing blacks, and not cases of whites who have been convicted of murdering blacks. It’s actually talking about the exact opposite, whites who have killed blacks and fallen under the justifiable homicide exemption. Something tells me that that number, while still likely low, will be higher as a percentage of the total justifiable homicides than white on black convicted murders are of total murders. It’s not an argument that one should try to make if they want to make this about something other than race, because while the actual reasons for it are very complex, it would be all to easy for a Jackson or a Sharpton to simplify it and say “when a black kills a white it’s murder, but when a white kills a black, it’s ‘justifiable homicide'”.

          Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 6:55 pm

          “Our disparities are great,” he said. “Targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business.”

          Maybe you can provide a transcript of Jackson’s remarks that provide a context that I sure cannot see beyond the words.

          I’m looking, too, but only find press reports thus far.

          Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 6:59 pm

          I know of a few notorious cases of murderers who were quite thoroughly prosecuted, such as the Tillman case.

          I was very supportive, even proud, of Texas working hard (over the Collective’s looney anti-capital punishment position) to see to it the Tillman’s killers were given due process.

        Awing1 in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 7:14 pm

        This is about as close as I could find:
        He added: “Blacks are under attack.” African American families are facing record home foreclosures and unemployment. Their children are burdened with student loan debt. States, particularly conservative ones, are passing voter laws that leaders know will disenfranchise blacks and other minorities. Meanwhile, the nation’s prisons are brimming with black faces, he said, and their numbers that suggest that the legal system is quicker to send blacks to prison than whites.

        Read more:

        Honestly though, do you believe the outrage is about whites killing blacks and being prosecuted for it, or whites killing blacks and not being prosecuted for it?

          Ragspierre in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 8:02 pm

          “African American families are facing record home foreclosures and unemployment. Their children are burdened with student loan debt.

          Objectively, that is a lie. It would be true to say “AMERICAN families are…”

          “States, particularly conservative ones, are passing voter laws that leaders know will disenfranchise blacks and other minorities.”

          Again, objectively, that is a lie. AT WORST, a very few people need a neighbor to help them obtain a readily available voter ID. Something tangible of the sort the NAACP used to do.

          “Meanwhile, the nation’s prisons are brimming with black faces”, he said, “and their numbers that suggest that the legal system is quicker to send blacks to prison than whites.”

          That is one suggestion. There are quite a few others we could discuss. One being the explosion of single-parent families coming directly on the passage of the War On Poverty, following a period when black Americans were making rapid progress toward parity with other Americans.

          “Honestly though, do you believe the outrage is about whites killing blacks and being prosecuted for it, or whites killing blacks and not being prosecuted for it?”

          To what degree there is any rational outrage (i.e., tied to something in reality) the latter.

          But the greatest part of the “outrage” is totally unrelated to anything that actually happened.

          As it very often the case.

          Awing1 in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 8:20 pm

          I’m not arguing their outrage is rational, and I’m certainly not arguing anything Jesse Jackson is saying is correct. What I am arguing is simply that if we want to counter the outrage, we have to first actually understand it, and using interracial murder numbers completely misses their point, and in fact is the exact opposite of that point. It’s about Zimmerman not being arrested. You could use statistics about overall homicide rates, or you could use statistics about justifiable homicide rates, but you absolutely cannot use statistics about murder rates because they’re completely irrelevant.

          Ragspierre in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 8:32 pm

          I think your last point is valid.

          What isn’t valid is ginning up a lynch-mob frenzy on the untruth that Zimmerman was not arrested (but should have been). The probable cause element was not established in the initial investigation, which leaves several further options if Zimmerman were found to have probably committed a crime. That is an on-going inquiry.

          The glaring dichotomy between demanding proper due process rights, and going into a fantasy-based frenzy in denial of Zimmerman’s due process rights will…ultimately…obscure whatever virtue there is in the first demand.

          As did Jackson’s hateful, looney, race-baiting bullshit. But he does have a community-organizing wing-man in the White House, and this is what they understand and think will work for them. I think they are passe.

          Awing1 in reply to Awing1. | March 27, 2012 at 8:41 pm

          I don’t disagree with any of that. My point was never to argue the merits of their argument, but rather to stop us from making a straw man argument that could be easily knocked down and then held up as an example that conservatives “just don’t get it” or something of that nature. It’s done all the time with some of the more illogical arguments that Glenn Beck makes, liberals hold them up and say “see here, conservatives have no real arguments, they just use logical fallacies to trick the weak minded, don’t ever agree with them.”

          Every time we make a bad argument, it harms the hundreds of good ones we have.

1. I keep posting that every day the news is not about Obama’s record is a good day for Democrats.

2. I could only stand a minute of Finney.

This kind of stuff is apparently what Democrats want to run on. Their assessments of Obama’s chances may be bleaker than the polls, pundits, or betting odds suggest.

3. Against proper defense and counterattacks, reckless attacks are ruinous—for the attacker. If the Republicans respond properly, the leftist ploy should backfire badly. (I’m thinking about how 1960s leftist turbulence got the persona non grata Nixon elected even though the FDR coalition was alive and well.)

4. Against timid defense, reckless attacks are devastating. If the Stupid Party doesn’t respond, they will get rolled. Again.

5. My concern is whether the Republicans, especially today’s RINOs, have what it takes to respond effectively.

6. Where are the Hispanic voices demanding due process for Zimmerman?

    Ragspierre in reply to gs. | March 27, 2012 at 6:15 pm

    I’ve been saying that Occupy will engender a “law and order” component in this election cycle as an unintended consequence of their flaming crazy.

    This could boost that.

    Hope Change in reply to gs. | March 27, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    Hi gs — “every day the news is not about Obama’s record is a good day for Democrats. You are right! you are right! you are right! That is ALL this about.

    gs, you also noted that if PROPERLY COUNTERED, these ridiculous attacks by Democrats would be backfiring on Democrats. And Establishment Republicans seem hopeless.

    Yes! Talk about incompetent!. Establishment Republicans are inept, emasculated, cornered, surrounded, subsumed by the MATRIX, bamboozled and bought off. As Newt says about Senate Republicans in his 2009 speech, “2012: VICTORY OR DEATH,” “confused as usual.”

    Newt responded about the Zimmerman – Treyvon case — with care for ALL Americans:

    And Newt on the scandalous, just UNBELIEVABLE “hot mic” moment, wherein Obama promises to sell out the USA on missile defense if re-elected.


    Newt effectively counters the narrative and gives the MSM a big dose of MASSIVE FAIL.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Hope Change. | March 28, 2012 at 12:38 am

      Yes, and contrast that with Santorum’s EpicFail comment on the case.

      What an embarrassment. (geez, I wish he’d left before FL. This could have been so much better)

Though no one tops the Professor, this is a worthy read (and it has pictures!)

Analysis: Manufacturing the Martin narrative

    OcTEApi in reply to Browndog. | March 27, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    “…political advisors do not want it transforming into animosity against Hispanics, a group Democrats desperately wish to avoid alienating.”

    During the debate about Arizona’s immigration law Bill 1070 the media promoted the White Hispanic divide because it promoted racism narrative… while the divide is that most Whites are against illegal immigration and Hispanics not so much.

    There is a much greater divide between Blacks and Hispanics.

    Leonard Pitts Jr.:
    In the U.S., privilege is about the color white
    As David R. Roediger observes in his book, “Working Toward Whiteness: How America’s Immigrants Became White,” they were emphatically taught that “white” was the identity that conferred status and privilege and that it was defined by distance from, and antipathy toward, black.

    Its NOT about how immigrants become White, its about how immigrants become Americans.

      Hope Change in reply to OcTEApi. | March 27, 2012 at 7:23 pm

      OcTEApi — you said, “Its NOT about how immigrants become White, its about how immigrants become Americans.

      I agree. What is the miracle that makes a person an American? No one knows. But it’s a magic no other country has. Land of opportunity.

      The Dennis Prager video is very instructive. Thank you.

      I also think that American Exceptionalism means that we are the one nation that is founded on the principle — “we hold these truths to be self-evident” — that sovereignty is a birthright to each individual from the Creator, inalienably belongs to the individual, cannot be taken away or reduced by government, and that as individuals, we loan power to the government. The awesomeness!

        BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Hope Change. | March 27, 2012 at 9:43 pm

        Just a bit of comparative demographics in equal democracies.

        Canada has 18% of its population born overseas. 84% of these have taken Canadian citizenship.

        Australia has 25% of its population born overseas. 5.59 million /22.5 million.

        Except for the famously other French mob both have high co – hesiveness.

        As wonderful as USA is -it isn’t just an American thing . These are also lands of opportunity & at present even more so than America.

While I’m skeptical about the value of hate crimes; tracking them could be a useful barometer. Did you know that there are half as many anti-Jewish hate crimes as anti-Black hate crimes? Given that the Jewish population of the U.S. is roughly one seventh of that of the black population, that means that per capita, Jews are targets of hate crimes at twice the rate of blacks.
I wouldn’t make too much out of it; most anti-Jewish hate crimes seem to be property crimes.
However if you use the hate crimes statistics as a barometer, I’d conclude that antisemitism is bigger problem in this country than racism.

Uncle Samuel | March 27, 2012 at 3:27 pm

Two sets of grieving parents:

Treyvon Martin’s parents have Trade-marked his name and other Treyvon-related phrases, and presumably his 13 year old photos, to keep anyone else from profiting from their use, and are heading off to DC to try to help Obama and friends make some kind of political gain out of his death.

Meanwhile, the Toulouse terrorist’s father, plans to sue France for killing his son, and not gassing and taking him alive. Moreover, he plans to give his son a hero’s funeral in Algeria.

Somehow, I’m having a hard time with their actions and reactions. There seems to be no grasp of good, evil, discernment between right and wrong, truth and lie in either of these cases. May the light of truth shine into the hearts and minds of these people (and their handlers), and bring wisdom, understanding, conviction of sin.

    Milhouse in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 27, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    Why did they give him the body? Should have burned it and dumped the ashes in the sewer.

      Squires in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 3:53 pm

      May his name be erased, etc.

      Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 6:25 pm

      Understanding my position is really HARSH, I’ve always held that Muslim terrorists should be buried in a pig-skin shroud.

      LukeHandCool in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 6:27 pm

      Should’ve given his body to the relatives of those murdered children so they could mutilate it first. Sorry, but when children are murdered it’s the law of the jungle for me.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 27, 2012 at 3:56 pm

    The Toulouse killer’s father’s reaction seems aligned with the family ideology/religion, but the Martin parents’ reactions might be better understood when we recognize that when a family member dies or is killed by any method that might bring shame – however that is defined by the family – there is often a palpable denial of reality by family members who are vulnerable with grief and often easily convinced the death was anything but the perceived shameful thing it might have been. The grieving Martin family’s choices:

    1) Our son graduated from petty crimes to the big time by feloniously assaulting a neighborhood watch captain and was killed in self-defense for it.

    2) Our son was minding his own business, obeying the law, when a racist thug shot him to death for the crime of being black in a hoodie.

    It isn’t hard to see how the Martin family might be convinced to go with choice number two, thereby avoiding the additional grief of accepting he may have brought on his own death with a criminal act.

    Imagine the bubble of race hustling activists currently cocooning the Martin parents – do we suppose they are accurately and honestly relating the facts of the case as they emerge, particularly when they do not support the race hustlers’ narrative?

    I give the Martin parents a full pass for their reactions to date, full of crippling grief as they must be, and surrounded by racist activists who historically, consistently place their cause above the truth whenever the two conflict. I do not think it currently reasonable to expect them to discern anything but ongoing grief, given they are being used by race hustlers and are caught up in a national media maelstrom, something with which they cannot possibly have any experience. The jury is out on the facts and on the Martin kid, but his family has committed no crime.

      Squires in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 27, 2012 at 5:09 pm

      You make sound points, but on the other hand, you have to remember that ghetto culture (which is no longer really confined to the ghetto) is a shame-culture, and shame cultures, evils and failures are almost invariably someone else’s fault, and there is no shame in the sense that shame is thought of from a guilt-culture perspective.

      Rape, rob, murder? If no one knows, or if you can maintain denial, then no guilt, no shame, no troubled conscious whatsoever. And if there is something undeniably wrong with your own thinking to behavior, use accusations and conspiracy theories to project those evils onto others.

      See: The Arab world.

      See: “Snitches get stitches.” (i.e., I do wrong with impunity and it is your obligation to cover for me in order to avoid the perceived shaming of being held accountable.)


        Henry Hawkins in reply to Squires. | March 27, 2012 at 7:24 pm

        “Rape, rob, murder? If no one knows, or if you can maintain denial, then no guilt, no shame, no troubled conscious whatsoever.”

        What you are describing is an anti-social personality, incapable of empathy or compassion for damage done to victims. It isn’t caused by rape, robbery, and murder. It is a prerequisite for shameless rape, robbery, and murder. Ox, cart?

        Also, the ‘ghetto culture’ you describe is not nearly so monolithic as you describe. Blaming others for one’s failures or malfeasance isn’t caused by the ‘ghetto culture’. For those living in a ghetto or ghetto-like poverty, any propensity to blame others leads to entrenchment, stasis, forever mired in that poverty. Such immaturity does not typically lead to progress and ascension from the ‘ghetto’. Blaming others is a juvenile act, as we see with developing children. It helps to enable shameless crime.

        [For clarity, I’m defining guilt as a state of being. You are guilty of an offense or you are not. I’m defining shame as one possible feeling one has towards the fact of being guilty of a crime. Anti-socials are guilty of crimes, but feel no shame over it. They literally do not care. I am sometimes guilty of jaywalking, but feel no shame over the crime, not because I’m anti-social, but because the crime is so very minor and victimless]

        Also, any list of achievers in any field you’d care to name is full of people who came originally from the ghetto or ghetto-like poverty. It is possible to work one’s way out and it happens all the time. It is also possible to behave in such a way you never get out, also very common.

      full of crippling grief as they must be,

      Does that crippling grief extend to trademarking your son’s name? I am wondering how much contact Mom had with her son, he was living for the moment with Dad at Dad’s girlfriend’s place. Make of all of that what you will, I am just not sure what it means.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to Gmax. | March 27, 2012 at 7:09 pm

        All hinges on what folks should have been doing all along… wait and see. Wait and see what the final set of facts turns out to be. Wait and see if trademarking his name is necessarily bad or unethical. For all you or I know, they intend to create some educational foundation or grant with the money. Or maybe they intend to vacation in Aruba with any money made. Who knows? Nobody knows. Then why speculate?

        I don’t know enough to ascribe motives to Zimmerman’s or Martin’s actions. I don’t know enough to ascribe motivations to Martin’s parents. Why guess? What need or desire is filled by guessing?

        Aggie95 in reply to Gmax. | March 27, 2012 at 9:54 pm

        he was at dad’s because he was suspended for dope

      Estragon in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 28, 2012 at 12:11 am

      There was no “denial” on their part when they failed to call authorities for three days when he didn’t come home. There was no “denial” when the cops declined to file charges, and the prosecutor concurred. They knew he got himself in a jam and paid the price. All the messages from friends and family on his Facebook page in those first weeks are just expressing sorrow and missing him, no outrage, no anger, no hint of any perception of injustice – because there was NO injustice.

      That’s why it was over three weeks later, after an ambitious lawyer approached them with a scheme to get a payday that the press conferences and manufactured outrage. Call in Sharpton and Jesse! Alert the media!

      Sorry, I have NO sympathy for a father who couldn’t be bothered to get off his girlfriend long enough to find out why his son wasn’t back from the store, or a mother who trademarks her dead son’s name and image because there might be a dollar in his “brand,” who both can fly to New York City to protest. It seems more like marketing than grief to me.

“Zimmerman told police Trayvon tried to grab his gun…”

Liberal on liberal action.

I’m sorry, but I couldn’t watch the video of the “ankle biter” Finney. She is the worst I’ve seen of MSM in quite some time.

“Where are the Hispanic voices demanding due process for Zimmerman?”

I have wondered that myself.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Scorpio51. | March 27, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    “Where are the Hispanic voices demanding due process for Zimmerman?” I have wondered that myself.

    Media blackout – doesn’t fit the narrative.

      LukeHandCool in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 27, 2012 at 6:30 pm

      Yep, and it’s just too close to election time. The usual lefty hispanic special interest groups will sacrifice him for the interests of the “rainbow coalition.”

        Henry Hawkins in reply to LukeHandCool. | March 27, 2012 at 7:28 pm

        There *might* be an element of lefty Hispanic groups not being sure which way to go on this, a conflict between wanting to support brother Zimmerman, and not wanting to oppose otherwise traditional allies, like black civil rights activists, Democrats, and liberals in general. I’ve seen nothing indicating this, but it seems logical on initial consideration.

    Estragon in reply to Scorpio51. | March 28, 2012 at 12:14 am

    My guess is the “white Hispanics” are staying indoors with the blinds pulled tight, and I can’t blame them.

    How is the members of the New Black Panther Party are not in prison over this? Talk about “vigilantism” – what better way to protest it than post a “dead or alive” bounty?

Professor, that table of data would be much more meaningful to most people if it were done with circles indicating the size of the number. I.e. the circle at the “white-on-white” intersection would be huge. Anybody out there good with Powerpoint or Excel?

The lawyers behind the media circus.

They phoned the Rev. Al Sharpton almost instantly, and organized marches with local civil rights activists. They also started pressing for federal involvement and alleging a cover-up from the get-go.

The results: The Sanford police chief received a no-confidence vote and stepped down temporarily. The prosecutor stepped aside to make way for a special prosecutor. The Justice Department and the FBI have joined the investigation. Celebrities from Cher to Donald Trump have gotten behind Trayvon’s case. And thousands have marched and protested across the nation.

Even President Barack Obama weighed in Friday on what he called a “tragedy.”

“You gain some experience,” said Parks, who has had a more behind-the-scenes role in the two cases as a matter of coincidence. “You brainstorm. You use what works and you don’t stop.”

Race is central to their practice.

Judge acquits 5 Hutaree militia members of all charges; 2 face only weapons counts

Another false narrative bites the dust

Just heard on KCMO – Kansas City that at least 1,000 gathered in the downtown area for Trayvon Martin.

Kansas City has been having black on black murders everyday during the past few years. Each year, the number increases. Police can barely keep up with all the cases.

Could someone please explain something that has been puzzling me greatly. Why is it that in almost every single story I’ve read on this, George Zimmerman is referred to as “Zimmerman”, but Trayvon Martin is referred to as “Trayvon”. I can’t recall a single story in which the shooter is referred to as “George”, and hardly a story in which the deceased is referred to as “Martin”. None of us is on first names basis with either one, so why this difference? On the one hand it seems to me to be tinged with racism; treating the black person as a mere boy while giving the Hispanic person the dignity of a surname. But that doesn’t accord with the political slant of most of these stories. Their sympathies are all with “Trayvon”, and full of outrage against “Zimmerman”; so why do they belittle the former by using his first name, and dignify the latter by using his surname?

    Gmax in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 5:24 pm

    Its a dog whistle. Trayvon is a name that only blacks give to their offspring. Similarly, Zimmerman makes him seem white, and maybe even Jewish? Dont assume anything innocent in any of this with the current media.

    malclave in reply to Milhouse. | March 27, 2012 at 5:58 pm

    I think it is to present Matin as a “mere boy”… that’s very consistent with the photo of Martin which the media was showing everywhere.

    The use of Zimmerman’s surname isn’t to “dignify” him, it’s to show him as an adult “White Hispanic”. The photo they’ve been using for him screams anything but “dignity”.

    So, the media is just pushing the story that a nice, young, friendly black man was gunned down by a scruffy “White Hispanic”.

    Yet another example of the media no longer being satisfied as the Fourth Estate, and embracing being a Fifth Column.

      LukeHandCool in reply to malclave. | March 27, 2012 at 6:34 pm

      The first-name basis lends a feeling of familiarity, like, “that could be my son.”

      The last-name basis lends a more distant feeling … and it sure doesn’t sound hispanic, does it?

      Sounds white, perhaps Jewish.

      Aggie95 in reply to malclave. | March 27, 2012 at 10:01 pm

      the media tried and by God because of the blogs ….they failed and have been exposed ….again for the agenda driven empty suits they are

[…] peace! No credibility!UPDATE II: If Obama had a son, he’d look Tweet like Trayvon.UPDATE III: Professor William Jacobson reminds us that no liberal narrative is a complete joke until Karen Finney gives us a pious sermon:Karen, […]

Obama has split this country in half – as bad as the Civil War.

He’s supposed to be a college-educated Constitutional Law Professor – and he doesn’t KNOW better than to weigh in and assign guilt? he doesn’t know that the proper thing to do is let the facts be viewed, the investigation be completed, the charges determined (If any), the trial take place, the jury decide? INNOCENT until proven guilty – but not with this race-baiting President.

He seized the opportunity to set people at each other’s throats.

The blowback might be bad enough that he will give a major speech, with lovely prose, and people will swoon that he is so well spoken, that he ‘gets it.’ He’s done it several times, but he himself has learned nothing, except that he can get away with it.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Rose. | March 27, 2012 at 10:18 pm

    Rose –

    IF charges are laid is the pivotal point of the argument. I know what you mean but your syntax is weak. Something in a bracket is generally a sub set or qualifier ).

    Words & their placement mean everything in this situation.

Had a thought:

I read that Mr. Martin, 17 year old Trayvon’s dad, is 28. I hope that was a misprint, while recognizing it might be accurate.

In any event, given his family facts, and assuming his dad had little contact with him (an admitted assumption), Trayvon statistically was doomed to a bad end.

That is a very sad reality in America, regardless of race.

Here’s what else that chart shows:

Whites are nearly twice as likely (13%) to be the victim of a Black attacker as Blacks are to be the victim (7%) of a White attacker.

Now, combine that with the fact that Blacks are about 12% of the population while Whites are about 70% (US Census)and you can see that the average Black person is a few orders of magnitude more likely to attack a White person than vice versa.

Only a real racist would point out that Zimmerman is not a radical, racist, right-wing extremist…

[…] Inconvenient Narratives In The Martin Case – Legal Insurrection GA_googleFillSlot("BelowPost_640x120"); window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({ appId : 248812318541713, status : true, // check login status cookie : true, // enable cookies to allow the server to access the session xfbml : true // parse XFBML }); }; (function() { var e = document.createElement('script'); e.src = document.location.protocol + '//'; e.async = true; document.getElementById('fb-root').appendChild(e); }()); […]

[…] mention that George Zimmerman’s a registered Democrat? Probably not. That’s likely an inconvenient truth for the left’s race-hatred […]

BannedbytheGuardian | March 27, 2012 at 11:20 pm

I have been following the case of Cristian Hernandez the 12 year old charged with 1st degree murder in Jacksonville.

His mother was 12. His father was 20 & received probation & is now a registered sex offender. (He was “only giving the 12 year old the love her mother did not “! )

Cristian’s mother has more children to man number 2 who beats up all the kids & shoots himself dead at home with 2 & 3 year covered in blood. Father has another daughter to another woman who drowns at 3.

12 year old kid kills 2 year old 1/2 brother after previously beating him up & breaking his leg.

Spring Break in Florida anyone?

[…] 479) Who is a registered Democrat who stalked and shot a black teen? […]

[…] little bit of clarity in the Trayvon Martin hullabaloo. What’s interesting is that if you are a white murder victim, […]

[…] an incident that, if the worst case were proved true, would be something so rare that it involves fewer than 300 criminals a year. 300 in a land of 300,000,000. This is not about news; it’s about an […]

[…] I get impression that the kids were told that they could be easily shot just for being black.  Which is a horrible thing to teach them because the great majority of white Americans pose no threat to black children.  I suspect that the kids have to know that they are unlikely to share Trayvon’s horrible fate because they have never met anyone who was killed by a “white Hispanic” neighborhood watch captain.  In fact, white on black (and black on white) crime is rare. […]