How about they start with the facts. Don't pick and choose what you present to sensationalize the story. First they defame the shooter, then they say the kid got kicked out of school, then they go back to the shooter again and say he was accused of DV, and so on. If you can't see the see-saw, you're blind.

Both parties made mistakes, nobody should have lost their life. Sad.

Which facts? In the Florida case we have two sets of "facts".

1. Zimmerman followed this kid
He called 911
He did not exhibit any defensive wounds
The kid did not exhibit any contusions on his hands consistent with beating on Zimmerman.
Zimmerman shot the kid.

Or

2. Zimmerman followed this kid
He called 911
Witnesses report that the kid attacked Zimmerman
Witnesses report that the kid was slamming Zimmerman's head into the ground.
Zimmerman shot the kid

Right now, the only facts that are consistent is that Zimmerman followed the kid, called 911, and shot the kid. And those facts mean virtually nothing without context.

Eddie,

"Right now, the only facts that are consistent is that Zimmerman followed the kid, called 911, and shot the kid. And those facts mean virtually nothing without context."

And that's exactly the problem. Media have been coloring the context since the beginning, rather than reporting that which they knew happened and not trying to fill in the blanks. But sensationalizing news is how to keep a story alive for days and weeks. If they can't keep it alive and moving, well, in the news business, yesterday's news is today's history. And they ain't in the business of reporting history. Americans hate history. Americans love American Idol and the Batchelor and any shallow-minded programming. But they do love trying complex issues they don't understand in the court of public opinion.

Sg

Salmo, you are right, but rather than blame the media, we have to acknowledge the role that the public plays in this (and, in fact, you have in your post). The media does what it does because it has a public that rewards them for what they do. Chicken - egg? I don't know. What I do know is that I prefer to wait rather than jump the gun. I guess that makes me an old fart. So it goes....

I'd agree that the NBC editing -- if true -- is reprehensible, and money says it will result in people getting fired.

To me this is a key difference between what red-staters call the "Lame-stream" media, and what the blue-staters call "Faux-news".

So yes, both sides make this "error". But can you seriously believe that Fox/Breitbart/Drudge hold THEMSELVES anywhere NEAR the standard of the left-wing media? A guy over-represents a story on this-american-life (not a news program, I might add) and it's national news. The majority of the press, and the decisive handling? By NPR themselves.

A selectively edited bit on Zimmerman? I bet a head (or heads) roll--and again NBC will lead the charge on how this is unacceptable.

But it's like a cheeky sport on Fox/Breitbart/Drudge. Distortions seem (to me) the order of the day. I'm not talking about opinions, i'm talking about willful DISTORTION.

I am old enough to admit that this may be perceptual on my part, but I sure don't see anywhere near the zeal for CORRECTING MISTAKES on the right-wing media as there is in the left. And I think --- as news media -- that gives the right vastly less credibility in my eyes.

Let a judge and jury decide the facts. The only reason the media is trying this case is because the justice system in Sanford has turned a blind eye to this case.

The media has always played a role is shining a light into dark places that we often do not want to see or know about.

Did you forget about Wall Street stealing hundreds of billions from the US Treasury a few years ago?

Don't let the facts get in your way bwp.

Only presented the info because Salmo said this " It wasn't the blacks who sold the whites into slavery"

It seems that Florida law is not the only thing that sucks. Wasn't it a jury of FLoridians that found Casey Anthony innocent?

Florida

I'm not certain about Florida law...but anywhere I can think of there's only one way that Zimmerman showed up at the police station in the back of a police car, in handcuffs, and that one way is that he was indeed arrested.

When he was arrested, he should have been booked.

None of this requires charges to be filed, and none of this requires a finding of fact that he did something wrong...just probable cause to arrest him, which clearly has taken place.

If he was arrested, why wasn't he booked? If he wasn't arrested, why was he transported to the police station in the back of a cop car wearing handcuffs?

In most states once you have been arrested, the clock starts ticking on how long the State has to charge you with a crime...usually 120 days.

We're well into that time now.

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. Cops don't bring charges, Prosecutors bring charges. Cops arrest, and investigate...prosecutors charge and try.

Because justifiable homicide is not a crime?
What evidence have you found that it was anything other than that?
I'm sure the police dept. captain would like to hear it.

The evidence against Mr. Zimmerman is manifest...nothing has to be proven to arrest him, just enough to establish probable cause, and the fact that he had to stalk and run down Martin in order to shoot him is plenty of probable cause no matter what the law, or what the jurisdiction.

The thing not being discussed right now is that Zimmerman was arrested...you do not get a ride to the cop shot in cuffs without that being the case.

When that happened, he has to be booked...which he wasn't, at least no one is saying that he was.

He doesn't have to be charged after being arrested, of course, and that technically is the prosecutor's job, though it's mostly done in conjunction with the cops...if the cops put together enough evidence to show that a crime may have been committed...not was committed, may have been...then the prosecutor should press charges.

Charges can always be dropped later if the evidence fails to reach a level high enough to take to court...happens all the time.

Without knowing the facts other than seeing the "witnesses" on TV, none of which are actually witnesses at all, except the one anonymous witness...and seeing the police video, hearing the 9-11 call...this seems like there is no reason whatsoever to not arrest, book and charge Zimmerman with a crime.

Once you do that, then the investigation will...or will not be able to...gather enough evidence to take to court.

Fish on...

Todd

He was arrested.

He was not booked, charged, or arraigned, but you do not get a ride to the police station in cuffs without being arrested.

You also do not get arrested without getting booked.

He was released before being booked, which would not happen at the cops' behest.

There's something mixed up about that.

Fish on...

Todd

WRONG AGAIN Todd.

bwp are you going to carry on like you did after Michael Jackson bought the farm?

What they say doesn't comport with the law, or reality...saying "he wasn't arrested" doesn't make it so.

When they read him his rights, cuffed him, and put him in the back of the squad car, he was under arrest.

Fish on...

Todd