whatever, not tryign it again- not sure why it won’t paragraph- but at least it’s not too much to sift through— but anyways, it’s goign to be tough tryign to read motive into someone’s sentence structure-
basically what hte previous said was “Was martin saying ‘ass cracker’ or was he saying ‘creepy ass’ cracker- there is a difference- West shoudl have questioend her mroe carefully to make it absolteuly clear what martin meant- We’re not sure if martin ever came out and said or even indicated he thoguht george was a homo- so far all we have is jenteal’s opinion that she thought martin thought george was- If amrtin cvame right out and stated soemthign akin to ‘that homo’ or had jenteal said “What do you mean ‘ass cracker’? do you think he’s queer?” then yeah- it could be established with a beyond reasonable doubt conclusion that martin felt george was queer
Which brings up antoehr great point- IF martin meant ‘ass cracker’ meaning he htought george was gay, and then decided to murder what he htought was a gay person- then Not only was martin racist agaisnt ‘niggers’ (in his own words) he was also apaprently homophobic- and it’;s unlcear why the lefgt isn’t turnign on martin for beign both racist and homophobic
It’s never been about principle for the left, the have none that we’d recognize as such. Racism and homophobia are quasi-legal psychobabble intended to undermine and eventually destroy the existing power structure. Does it damage the existing power structure for Trayvon Martin to be depicted as racist or homophobic? No, it does not. Therefore, he isn’t.
First, there is no recording, so there is always doubt as to what was said and what meaning was intended.
However, if you perform a web search for the phrase “ass cracker” in conjunction with the word “gay” it will return many hits which collectively confirm that the term is used to denote anal sex between homosexual males.
All Z needs is reasonable doubt, not “beyond reasonable doubt.”
Most likely, West left it alone since Jeantel confirmed that she heard and understood M to consider Z a homosexual (’pervert’). I do not know if you have been around young disadvantaged black students in remedial school, but their speech can be shockingly graphic and matter-of-fact at the same time. There would be imho nothing strange about M and Jeantel referring to Z as an ass cracker in the anal sex sense. It would imho simply be just another phrase in their everyday vocabulary that they would employ to describe someone who was acting in the manner of what they presumed to be a homosexual stalker. West only needed the references to “pervert” and “rapist,” but no doubt he got the notion that M was hostile to homosexuals, and that provides a motive for M to suckerpunch Z and try to beat him down. Should West choose to invoke further reasonable doubt in order to impugn a motive for M to initiate aggression against Z in his closing arguments, a web search of the term “ass cracker” will provide that. West does not need to circle back and give Jeantel an opportunity to retract the motive that supports Z’s version of the incident that she just gave West. Actually, doing that would be shooting himself in the foot.
I did see the term pop up in a gay forum in web searches I performed a couple of hours after the testimony. However, when I followed the search engine web link, the thread had been removed. I conjectured at the time that the forum moderator did not want to attract further possibly violent attention to gays in schools as a result of encouraging more widespread discussion of the term.
No one should be bullied simply because of their lifestyle-- especially school age minors.
If what Jeantel said was true about M's attitude towards gays, there may be more witnesses among his former student colleauges who could corroborate it.
It might be interesting for the Z defense team to learn why the grief counseling to M's high school was delayed for a month. (For example, perhaps it was to attempt to avoid inciting violence against gay students at the school, and perhaps they already know.)