Trayvon Martin Hoax movie

[Bennyonesix1]

New movie about trayvon. It's excellent. Everyone knows it was a hoax but now it's clear what happened.

https://youtu.be/_t-wtTEp7G0

Here's McWhorter and Lowry on it:


https://youtu.be/_t-wtTEp7G0


Edit

Here is movie link

https://youtu.be/QAw5ykIPOBM

[Boris]

Hoax? Like it's all made up? What does that mean?

[Bennyonesix1]

Watch the movie? It's good.

Maybe listen to the podcast?

Hint: false witness by a false witness regarding the most material testimony.

[Schlegel]

Hoax? Like it's all made up? What does that mean?

In the sense that the star witness lied massively.

I know Benny posted it, but even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes.

[Bennyonesix1]

The star witness wasn't even the actual witness. And was mentally retarded and lying. The actual witness wouldn't lie for the state.

[nafod]

Hoax? So Trayvon is alive? Star witness to what?

[Bennyonesix1]

Sorry here is movie link

https://youtu.be/QAw5ykIPOBM

[Schlegel]

Hoax? So Trayvon is alive? Star witness to what?

Rachel Jeantel. Presented as TM's girlfriend who was on the phone with him. There is actually considerable evidence that the real girlfriend was her half sister. Prosecutors said early on TM was on phone with girlfriend "Diamond Eugene ". They later present RJ, who says that's her nickname.

Now, have you ever heard of someone who's nickname is the actual name of their sibling?

[Bennyonesix1]

This false witness testified that Trayvon told her he was being followed by Zimmerman and that he was concerned by Zimmerman's behavior. It was her false testimony that established the State's claim that Zimmerman was the aggressor. And over rode his claim of self-defense. Moreover, the actual witness refused to testify as the State wanted because it would have been a lie. So no arguments as to the testimony was accurate even if uttered by a different person (which is absurd but would certainly have been trotted out).

It was a complete frame job by the State.

[nafod]

Wasn't he acquitted?

[Grandpa's Spells]

The star witness wasn't even the actual witness.

There was no star witness. There was no hoax. You live in a fantasy world.

[Bennyonesix1]

Let me just re-iterate for the record that I think your opinions are worthless and boring and uninsightful.

I also think that given a chance, you'd have reported the majority of the old posters here to HR or their wives. It's obvious to me that your presence had been instrumental in killing this board.

Your relentless re-capitulation of facebook-tier bien-pensant neoliberalism and the overwhelming sense that you'd report us all to HR or doxx us if you could chills the conversation.

No one likes a narc and if you were to leave, we'd see a significant uptick in use.

That being said, I'll respond for the sake of the others who might read this.

Your response is a semantic one and has nothing to do with the actual claims made. You merely take issue with the words "star" and "hoax".

1) The woman who falsely claimed to be a) trayvon's gf and b) to have heard him state just before the killing that he (trayvon) was afraid of Zim and had been followed by him for no reason was absolutely the Star Witness: legally and narratively. Her false testimony was the entire basis for suit. Without it there was nothing. That is why the State, after learning the actual gf and only percipient witness to what Trayvon said about Zim and his actions refused to testify to anything disproving Zim's self-defense theory used an imposter to make false statements.

2) The title of the movie has the word Hoax in it. It's not my movie. I didn't name it. It's just a title. But the State did try to sell a false narrative to the jury and the public.

[newguy]

Can someone please for the love of zeus just give us a basic idea of what the "hoax" was. Yes. I have the link to the movie. Thank you. But rather let's, in the spirit of brotherhood, just share the damn premise.

Was the girl who they say was on the phone not actually on the phone?
Or was she really on the phone but not really his girlfriend?

We know that the Zim was following Trayvon because we have his 911 call, right? Where he says he is following and the operator tells him stop. I'm remember that correctly aren't I?

[Bennyonesix1]

It's been said a number of times. It was a complete frame attempt by the State with collaboration from the family.

The witness was not the gf. Had not spoken to the decedent that day. And made up her testimony. Testimony which opposed Zim's self-defense contention. Moreover, the State and everyone on Trayvon's team knew this as well.

The actual gf had been on the phone but refused to testify as the State wanted: that Zim was the aggressor. So, the state got the gf's mentally retarded half sister to pretend to be the gf and lie in court.

This is textbook sec 1983 re: the State and libel/slander re: the family and their outside counsel.

You could also listen to the podcast. It's by two very intelligent and reputable professors.

[newguy]

It's been said a number of times. It was a complete frame attempt by the State with collaboration from the family.

The witness was not the gf. Had not spoken to the decedent that day. And made up her testimony. Testimony which opposed Zim's self-defense contention. Moreover, the State and everyone on Trayvon's team knew this as well.

The actual gf had been on the phone but refused to testify as the State wanted: that Zim was the aggressor. So, the state got the gf's mentally retarded half sister to pretend to be the gf and lie in court.

This is textbook sec 1983 re: the State and libel/slander re: the family and their outside counsel.

You could also listen to the podcast. It's by two very intelligent and reputable professors.

So the girl who testified that she was on the phone was not the girl who was actually on the phone?

And it's crazy that this was 8 years ago.

[Bennyonesix1]

Yes. A false witness bearing false witness.

Not the gf. Not the one on the phone. And also lied. All backed by the State and Trayvon's family.

[Grandpa's Spells]

It's been said a number of times. It was a complete frame attempt by the State with collaboration from the family.

Zimmerman would have gone to trial with no witness testimony at all.

CCL/CCW courses are pretty clear that you need to be particularly careful about nonlethal/nonviolent confrontations when carrying, because you can be held responsible for escalations. A specific example cited is, gun owner argues over parking spot in lot, gets out of car. A fight breaks out, gun owner is losing, his gun could be taken by the other person, and he shoots other person. Gun owner is very likely at least going to trial. Cops will ask questions like "Why did you get out of your car?"

Zimmerman went out with his gun literally looking for trouble. He followed somebody he thought was suspicious while armed, which he wasn't empowered or trained to do. He was allegedly attacked, and shot and killed the person. This is a scenario in which you would expect Zimmerman to go to trial, especially once it was established that the kid he killed was staying with family in the neighborhood.

There was literally nothing unusual about this going to trial. It is what you'd expect. It's what they teach people who want to carry a gun.

The only thing remarkable about all this is that a certain group of white Americans still stew about it years after acquittal.

[Bennyonesix1]

Again, I'll respond for others.

The case was only taken to trial after massive outrage from the press and media and online petitions. The State was not inclined to try the case because self-defense was clear. In order to try the case, the State had to fabricate witnesses and testimony. Which they did.

This is admitted by both McWhorter and Loury.

And again, you are not responding to the actual claims.

Edit

McWhorter and Loury agree that the case was only taken to trial because of the media exposure and petitions.

[Grandpa's Spells]

The State was not inclined to try the case because self-defense was clear.

Self defense was not clear, since Zimmerman was armed and pursuing someone. If that person ends up dead, you expect an indictment.

[Bennyonesix1]

Jfc the State only pursued charges after the media hue and cry and the petitions.

And in order to over come the "not-clear" self-defense claim they fabricated a witness and testimony on that point.

What are you doing? What is wrong with you?

[nafod]

So if I want to kill someone in FL, I call 911 and say I am following someone because I perceive them as a threat, and then call them back later saying I just shot them in the head because they threatened me. As long as no one saw it, I am good to go?

[Bennyonesix1]

Fuck

The State was not intending to bring charges because they evaluated the case as one of self-defense.

The media then went nuts and they only then filed charges.

The State then fabricated a witness and testimony on the self-defense issue because they made the decision they could not win otherwise.

That is what a frame is. Definitionally.

It wasn't even enough of a hard case to make a 1L exam question out of.

[Grandpa's Spells]

Jfc the State only pursued charges after the media hue and cry and the petitions.

I'm saying this is a textbook example of something that goes to trial regardless, despite what you claim you know about the mindset of the prosecutors.

And in order to over come the "not-clear" self-defense claim they fabricated a witness and testimony on that point.

I've worked with prosecutors, and they are generally a conservative bunch. Engaging in a conspiracy that would cause career-ending, nationwide, massive outrage if revealed and relies on a pretty dumb teenage girl sticking to her story is not... very... probable. This is particularly the case when they could had the same result (indictment, trial, acquittal) without it.

If you removed the race of the parties from the story, and took Zimmerman's story at face value, you would expect same result.

[Bennyonesix1]

God damn it. I keep telling you what actually happened and you keep blurbling on about what you imagine happened.

The state did not want to pursue charges. Then did after media pressure. And manufactured a witness and testimony because the case was so weak.

That is what happened in real life.

Fuck your credentials. I've worked with prosecutors and judges in both the State and Federal systems as well. Who cares?

[Bennyonesix1]

Laughing over the email/txt messages these two are sending to each other.