Critical Thinking - Yesterday I posted a video and CNN story that hit the “national news” of a Step-Father in a fenced back yard, with a baseball mitt, and a belt, and a young boy, with a baseball.
The video was not posted just to “stir emotion”….. It was posted because there is a critical aspect to the Trayvon Martin case that people are overlooking. Well, most people. Bear with me.
Like the Trayvon Martin case, yesterday’s video, which drew the ire of many TreeHouse participants, was/is a media narrative. The media narrative was “Step-Father beats Step-son for dropping ball while playing catch“. That was the substance of the media construct, and it included a nice u-tube video to support it.
There is only one problem. There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING, within that actual video to support that assertion. Go back and look at it again. Junior was not smacked for dropping the ball, in fact the ball never leaves his hand – nor do you even see in the video a game of catch – It is just not evident. Again, go back and look at it. There is NOTHING within that video to support a claim that “a boy was beaten by his step-father for dropping a ball while playing catch“. Nothing.
Yet almost everyone accepted that fact. Why?
The only thing that draws you to believe that was/is the accompanying narrative with the video. If you just watched the video, without any predisposition toward what you are witnessing, you “might” draw that conclusion. However, when you watch the video combined with the narrative you are CERTAIN to draw that conclusion. But why?….
You see, it is the combination of the video along with the narrative that directs your evaluation and conclusion. So ask yourself a question: which is having more of an influence upon me, the narrative OR the video?
What does this have to do with George Zimmerman?
Well, if there was a video of George watching Trayvon, and if there was video of George getting out of his truck and walking toward Trayvon, and if then Trayvon was shot, well, you might readily draw the conclusion that George Zimmerman got out of his truck to shoot Trayvon Martin.
If such a video existed, and if a narrative of “George Zimmerman was on the hunt for a rabid negro dog to murder in cold blood“…. well, you see where this is headed…..
It is the narrative that draws the conclusion. NOT what you actually witness. This is the key distinction behind Critical Thinking as opposed to Cognitive Acceptance.
In this example George Zimmerman would be guilty based solely on the narrative. But that would never happen right? ….. Wait, no…. huh,…. what?
So what’s my point?
Remember the video of Trayvon at the 7-11 and how we looked at it critically, evaluated the illogical narrative, and then based solely on it not making any sense whatsoever for a 17-year-old to walk a mile, in the rain, to get “iced tea” for himself and “skittles” for his *cough* brother, we were able to assemble the more fact based truth? Remember that?
Would it surprise you to know that the FBI, the federal Department of Justice, the State Police, the Sanford Police Department, the State Attorney General’s office, the entire Law Enforcement apparatus et al, had no clue that Trayvon “stayed” at the 7-11 until 6:29pm?
Would that surprise you?
Well it’s true.
That’s right. In the same way that many drew the conclusion of brutal step-dad beating step-son based solely on the scripted narrative you chose to believe, in that very same way the entire Law Enforcement apparatus never looked one iota into anything other than Trayvon leaving the 7-11 after he purchased his tea and skittles at 6:24pm.
Why? Because it, the fact of it, did not fit their psyche of critical thinking. The script was already written and Cognitive Acceptance of the 6:24 pm departure was embedded; There was no need to look further.
The prosecution narrative of the Trayvon Shooting was drawn to conclusion with the introduction of the Probable Cause Affidavit. There was/is no subsequent investigation, no ongoing inquiry, nor any follow-up on any aspect of the case which would lead them in a divergent direction from the case facts as they chose to know them at that moment.
In short they had investigated, researched, queried, questioned and summarized. The prosecution investigation was/is done. They were/are not going to do any further investigative research to undermine their own case, or change the facts to support a different conclusion that might lead to an acquittal for George Zimmerman.
Consider – Treeper ”CrossThread”, a member of our community, sent Mark NeJame, the legal analyst for CNN and Orlando based attorney who directed George Zimmerman to Mark O’Mara, a link to the video research we had done along with the video compilation of Treeper Diwataman. He received this response from NeJame:
Thanks for the email and inquiry. I did read the online article and viewed the video(s).
I think that some very interesting points are raised in it and apparently a significant amount of time was put into it as well.
I am bothered by some of the generalizations made by the host. Also, I’m not certain at all that I buy the “conspiracy” concept about TM and the other patrons at the store. Nothing that they did suggested any criminal or questionable activity. I do find it interesting with the suggestion that TM did seem to reappear.
I really need to spend more time with the site and video. I think as discovery comes out in the case, this video may make a bit more sense…one way or the other.
Thanks for getting it to me. I do appreciate it.
There will be lots of ups and downs for both sides in the case. Be prepared for a tumultuous time with it.
The problem for NeJame is he’s now aware of exculpatory evidence and he is a “legal media analyst”. What to do?…. What to do?…. Yikes.
Setting aside the dilemma this places Mark NeJame in, and his obvious concern about his exposure to sunlight, what you recognize is something we have independently confirmed. The prosecution team, ”Team Skittles” et al has no idea what actually transpired that night beyond their pre-scripted determinations.
We were able to independently confirm that law enforcement had no idea about the “Three Stooges”, nor the purchase ”blunts for Trayvon” and potential quid-pro-quo sale of Marijuana to the stooges.
They did not know because there was no need to find out based on their original determinations. They already had their mind made up. However, Team Freedom consisting of George Zimmerman, his family and representatives, are well aware of “Curly” and the 3 stooges.
This is KEY and central to the upcoming acquittal. Why?
Because simply the questioning of the 3 Stooges will reveal (note I want to say *has revealed* but retain prudence) factual possessions that Trayvon carried on his person when he left the 7-11 but WERE NOT on him physically when he encountered George.
This specifically and directly undermines the entire prosecution narrative because it reflects the factual reality of Trayvon going ‘somewhere after he ran’ and then ‘returning’ to confront George.
Within this “going somewhere then return” to the physical location of the encounter the entire case against George Zimmerman falls apart, collapses and disintegrates in front of the tearful eyes of a prosecution about to be covered in egg faced embarrassment.
This case will never make it to trial in any form. The only matter being determined RIGHT NOW is how to acquit George Zimmerman without violence as a consequence of the insufferable rush to judgement and narration selling.
Who is going to take the blame for a false construct and investigation.? and who is going to be allowed to save face?