Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Did Rachael actually say all this on the Piers Morgan show?

5 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I was just listening to Limbaugh.  And according to Limbaugh,  Rachael said Trayvon was indeed beating up Zimmerman.  But it was just what she called Trayon doing "whup ass" and Zimmerman didn't know that.  And that Zimmerman should have known that it was ONLY "whup ass" (giving Zimmerman a good beating) and not trying to kill him and because of that Zimmerman shouldn't have fought back with his gun.
AND there's more.  Limbaugh reports Rachael as saying Trayvon wasn't giving the "whup ass" to Zimmerman because he thought Zimmerman was racist.
It was because Trayvon thought Zimmerman was gay and was following him with the intent of raping him.

Did anyone get to watch the Piers Morgan program when this interview took place and can you confirm any of this?

Sal

Sal

I saw the interview.

I was coming in from baseball practice and my wife was watching it.

I'll have to admit, it was fascinating.

I find Rachel to be very brave and brutally honest.

She said that she told Trayvon that Zimmerman might be a rapist.

And, when asked by Morgan that if Trayvon was confronted or attacked by Zimmerman would he whoop ass (fight back), she acknowledged that he probably would.

What I took from the interview is that Zimmerman was definitely pursuing Trayvon, Trayvon was freaked out by it, and Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

It's really a shame that her testimony was disregarded due to what she looked like and how she spoke.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Sal wrote:I saw the interview.

I was coming in from baseball practice and my wife was watching it.

I'll have to admit, it was fascinating.

I find Rachel to be very brave and brutally honest.

She said that she told Trayvon that Zimmerman might be a rapist.

And, when asked by Morgan that if Trayvon was confronted or attacked by Zimmerman would he whoop ass (fight back), she acknowledged that he probably would.

What I took from the interview is that Zimmerman was definitely pursuing Trayvon, Trayvon was freaked out by it, and Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

It's really a shame that her testimony was disregarded due to what she looked like and how she spoke.

Limbaugh said she was intimating that Trayvon was wanting to start the "whup ass" and told the reason why.  And it was only after that that Morgan jumped in in defense of Trayvon and asked her "but do you think Trayvon would have whupped ass to defend himself"?  

I'll try to find a written transcript or the video of the interview to help clear that up.

Sal

Sal

Here's the transcript;

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/15/pmt.01.html

And, here's the exchange you're interested in ...

MORGAN: Because of the make-up of the jury? Do you think it was just wrong that you had no black people on the jury at all?

JEANTEL: No, not that. They don't understand, they understand -- he was just bashed or he was killed. When somebody bashes like blood people, trust me, the area I live, that's not bashing. That's just called whoop ass. You do that (INAUDIBLE). That's what it is.

MORGAN: Would Trayvon, if he had been attacked or had been confronted, and he was scared, would he have whooped ass, as you put it? JEANTEL: Whoop ass.

MORGAN: Could he -- would he have done that. Could he have done that?

JEANTEL: What?

MORGAN: Would he have defended himself if he'd been in that position?

JEANTEL: Yes, in my mind -- well, in reality, Trayvon, before his death, he thought I was still on the phone. I could have called out for help or something. But I wasn't on the phone. The struggle (INAUDIBLE) because Trayvon have an Android. If you click on the Android, that can end the call. And there was a struggle, so somebody had to be on top of Trayvon.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

"...  When somebody bashes like blood people, trust me, the area I live, that's not bashing. That's just called whoop ass. You do that (INAUDIBLE). That's what it is."

I just watched the video before reading your transcript too.  That obviously is referring to Martin bashing and whoop assing Zimmerman.

What would have been a lot more informative is if Morgan had not right then immediately interrupted her train of thought and planted in her mind that the whoop assing and bashing was Martin defending himself.  
Because it sounded to me like she was in the process of justifying the whoop ass and bashing if it was Martin doing it first.  And Morgan realized that too and that's when he jumped in to cut that off.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote: "...  When somebody bashes like blood people, trust me, the area I live, that's not bashing. That's just called whoop ass. You do that (INAUDIBLE). That's what it is."

Because it sounded to me to me like she was in the process of justifying the whoop ass and bashing if it was Martin doing it first.  

She testified in court and has said on more than one occasion that she heard Zimmerman confront Trayvon.

She heard Trayvon ask Zimmerman why he was following him, heard Zimmerman ask Trayvon what he was doing there, heard a scuffle, and heard Trayvon yeliing, "Get off, get off!".

Did you not follow the trial?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

JEANTEL: Parents need to stop acting dumb. If you're going to tell your child, oh, a stranger, oh, you tell your child one thing -- run away, trying to find somebody, that's not what Trayvon was doing?

So why -- so why the jury -- they're all parents -- well, some of them are parents. And they've been telling their -- their child that. Now, you're going to tell me you're going to tell your child to stand there (ph)? No.


Here's my interpretation of that. "Trayvon is not going to run away from a confrontation like white parents tell their children to do. He's not just going to stand there".

And when you consider what she's already been saying that "whoop ass" and "bashing" is just an accepted thing in her environment, I think she's intimating that Trayvon engaged first and she's trying to give the reasons why she thinks it was justified.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Sal wrote:
Bob wrote: "...  When somebody bashes like blood people, trust me, the area I live, that's not bashing. That's just called whoop ass. You do that (INAUDIBLE). That's what it is."

Because it sounded to me to me like she was in the process of justifying the whoop ass and bashing if it was Martin doing it first.  

She testified in court and has said on more than one occasion that she heard Zimmerman confront Trayvon.

She heard Trayvon ask Zimmerman why he was following him, heard Zimmerman ask Trayvon what he was doing there, heard a scuffle, and heard Trayvon yeliing, "Get off, get off!".

Did you not follow the trial?

She's been coached what to say and not to say when giving testimony in a trial,  Sal.  Here she's speaking spontaneously without that filter.  There is a HUGE difference.

Guest


Guest

During two interviews she did not add "get off get off". She offered that later and in the trial. This is why she was not credible.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
Bob wrote: "...  When somebody bashes like blood people, trust me, the area I live, that's not bashing. That's just called whoop ass. You do that (INAUDIBLE). That's what it is."

Because it sounded to me to me like she was in the process of justifying the whoop ass and bashing if it was Martin doing it first.  

She testified in court and has said on more than one occasion that she heard Zimmerman confront Trayvon.

She heard Trayvon ask Zimmerman why he was following him, heard Zimmerman ask Trayvon what he was doing there, heard a scuffle, and heard Trayvon yeliing, "Get off, get off!".

Did you not follow the trial?

Martin confronted Zimmerman. You got it ass backwards.

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Her testimony was scripted.

Sal

Sal

I believe her, and I'll tell you straight up what I think happened.

Zimmerman tried to apprehend Trayvon.

The wannabee cop wanted to have Trayvon in custody when the real cops arrived.

But, when he put his hands on Trayvon, Trayvon fought back and got the best of him.

Then the wimp pulled his equalizer and shot the kid through the heart.

Obviously, there wasn't enough evidence to prove that happened, and they basically just threw Rachel Jeantel's testimony under the bus.

And a weak, cowardly killer skated and was given back his gun.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:

She's been coached what to say and not to say when giving testimony in a trial,  Sal.  Here she's speaking spontaneously without that filter.  There is a HUGE difference.

BS.

If there was a script, she sure as hell wasn't following it.

lol

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:I believe her, and I'll tell you straight up what I think happened.

Zimmerman tried to apprehend Trayvon.

The wannabee cop wanted to have Trayvon in custody when the real cops arrived.

But, when he put his hands on Trayvon, Trayvon fought back and got the best of him.

Then the wimp pulled his equalizer and shot the kid through the heart.

Obviously, there wasn't enough evidence to prove that happened, and they basically just threw Rachel Jeantel's testimony under the bus.

And a weak, cowardly killer skated and was given back his gun.

Don't worry comrade... the State will give you social justice.

“I am concerned about this case and as we confirmed last spring,the Justice Department has an open investigation into it,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told the NAACP at their national convention in Orlando yesterday. “While that inquiry is ongoing,I can promise that the Department of Justice will consider all available information before determining what action to take.”

Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:JEANTEL:  Parents need to stop acting dumb. If you're going to tell your child, oh, a stranger, oh, you tell your child one thing -- run away, trying to find somebody, that's not what Trayvon was doing?

So why -- so why the jury -- they're all parents -- well, some of them are parents. And they've been telling their -- their child that. Now, you're going to tell me you're going to tell your child to stand there (ph)? No.


Here's my interpretation of that. "Trayvon is not going to run away from a confrontation like white parents tell their children to do.  He's not just going to stand there".

And when you consider what she's already been saying that "whoop ass" and "bashing" is just an accepted thing in her environment,   I think she's intimating that Trayvon engaged first and she's trying to give the reasons why she thinks it was justified.

Exactly Bob. A majority of black people think it is acceptable to hit someone. That has been my life experience.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

See now we're getting somewhere.

The fact is we don't know who engaged who first.  What testimony and evidence we have to determine that is more than inconclusive enough to reveal one all-important thing.
That there definitely is "reasonable doubt".  

Since we have established that Martin being the aggressor is a reasonable possibility (that there is reasonable doubt that it was Zimmerman),  it all comes down to this.  Did what Zimmerman was doing before the confrontation,  give Martin the justification to be the aggressor according to the law?  Not according to Sal and not according to me.  But according to the law?

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:I believe her, and I'll tell you straight up what I think happened.

Zimmerman tried to apprehend Trayvon.

The wannabee cop wanted to have Trayvon in custody when the real cops arrived.

But, when he put his hands on Trayvon, Trayvon fought back and got the best of him.

Then the wimp pulled his equalizer and shot the kid through the heart.

Obviously, there wasn't enough evidence to prove that happened, and they basically just threw Rachel Jeantel's testimony under the bus.

And a weak, cowardly killer skated and was given back his gun.

That's total made up bullshit opposite of the evidence.

Sal

Sal

Dreamsglore wrote:A majority of black people think it is acceptable to hit someone. That has been my life experience.

Your life experience has made you a despicable human being.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Dreamsglore wrote:A majority of black people think it is acceptable to hit someone. That has been my life experience.

And there we have it, overt and in plain text.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:A majority of black people think it is acceptable to hit someone. That has been my life experience.

Your life experience has made you a despicable human being.

I can say the same thing about you. Half the violent crimes in this country are black on black and that's just the facts.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

But Sal, it was Rachael you just heard who was saying that whoop ass and "bashing" is a part of hers and Trayvons culture.

The other day we were trying to understand why there is so much violence in the black community, especially in the inner city of places like Chicago.

I think Rachael has now given us some insight into that.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:

The fact is we don't know who engaged who first.  What testimony and evidence we have to determine that is more than inconclusive enough to reveal one all-important thing.

The ONLY evidence we have of the initial confrontation is Rachel Jeantel's testimony.

She was the only witness to it, and her testimony is pretty damn conclusive.

Unfortunately, that testimony was discarded because it came from a young urban black woman.

Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:But Sal,  it was Rachael you just heard who was saying that whoop ass and "bashing" is a part of hers and Trayvons culture.

The other day we were trying to understand why there is so much violence in the black community,  especially in the inner city of places like Chicago.

I think Rachael has now given us some insight into that.

That has been my experience in all the years of child abuse cases in Fl and Al. It is an accepted practice of beating your kids as well. If that makes me a racist then so be it. It is what it is.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:But Sal,  it was Rachael you just heard who was saying that whoop ass and "bashing" is a part of hers and Trayvons culture.

The other day we were trying to understand why there is so much violence in the black community,  especially in the inner city of places like Chicago.

I think Rachael has now given us some insight into that.

But there’s a huge problem with attempt to shift the conversation: There’s no such thing as “black-on-black” crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime—86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, you’ll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other.

What Shapiro and others miss about crime, in general, is that it’s driven by opportunism and proximity; If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, it’s because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as well—whites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.

Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop. In Washington, D.C., for example, fewer than 10 percent of black youth are in a gang, have sold drugs, have carried a gun, or have stolen more than $100 in goods.


Overall, figures from a variety of institutions—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics—show that among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are at their lowest rates in 40 years, as are rates of violent crime and victimization. And while it’s true that young black men are a disproportionate share of the nation’s murder victims, it’s hard to disentangle this from the stew of hyper-segregation (often a result of deliberate policies), entrenched poverty, and nonexistent economic opportunities that characterizes a substantial number of black communities. Hence the countless inner-city anti-violence groups that focus on creating opportunity for young, disadvantaged African-Americans, through education, mentoring, and community programs. Blacks care intensely about the violence that happens in their communities. After all, they have to live with it.

“Black-on-black crime” has been part of the American lexicon for decades, but as a specific phenomenon, it’s no more real than “white-on-white crime.” Unlike the latter, however, the idea of “black-on-black crime” taps into specific fears around black masculinity and black criminality—the same fears that, in Florida, led George Zimmerman to focus his attention on Trayvon Martin, and in New York, continue to justify Michael Bloomberg’s campaign of police harassment against young black men in New York City.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/the-trayvon-martin-killing-and-the-myth-of-black-on-black-crime.html

Guest


Guest

Her testimony was tainted and influenced by the lawyers and family. She admitted she lied about it.It wasn't because she was black. Now who's a damn racist?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum