Zimmerman Walks

[whell]

Originally Posted by barbara

You have absolutely no understanding of cultural differences and how they impact communication.

Just because your life experiences are so far removed from her life experiences does not mean she was not credible or believable. It only means you don't have the capacity to relate to those who are different than yourself.... Just like the older, white jurors.

And, no, this post doesn't damage my credibility but I did find that comment amusing coming from you!

Some reading material for you...

http://www.policymic.com/mobile/arti...t-your-english

This is hillarious. You're actually asking folks to believe this bullshit?

Here's a list of what we've been asked to believe by those of you who believe yourselves to be so much more enlightened than everyone else:

- Ms Jeantel doesn't have a credibility problem. Not only can't she read her own handwriting, she's speaking in a language that only she, Mr Martin, and some of you are capable of understanding.

- The prosecution failed to comprehend that she was speaking in a manner that the jury wouldn't understand. Therefore, they failed to coach / caution their star witness to make sure she used language that the jurors, who we're asked to believe are at the same time elitist and intellectually challenged, could understand during her testimony.

- The word "cracka" has a meaning that, sadly, was lost on the jury. This meaning is so obscure to "the elite" in society that its meaning, as used by Mr Martin on that fateful night, somehow may have mattered in the disposition of this case by the jury if they'd only been "street enough" to understand it. No matter that definition that the word "cracka" as used by Mr Martin and defined by Ms Jeantel cannot be verified.

I'm sure you'll find some folks around here to buy the shit you're peddling, so keep up the good work.