• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the George Zimmerman trial be televised?

Should the GZ trial be televised?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 3 15.8%

  • Not sure, but I'm open to the idea.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No.

    Votes: 15 78.9%

  • Other.

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • Total voters
    19
  • Poll closed .
radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Should the George Zimmerman trial be televised?

I do not start yet another GZ thread lightly, but I see a great deal of conflicting information out there... on both sides... and I'm thinking that televising the trial would actually be a public service. Then, ALL the evidence that will be actually presented will be full public knowledge and there will be a whole lot less guessing, which could potentially lead to civil unrest, which I would like to avoid.
 
There should be no trial. To have a trial would clearly be an illegal malicious prosecution.
 
I haven't gotten into this topic much, as there's just a lot of conflicting info being bantered about.

However, if cases involving the charges against Zimmerman normally get televised, then there needs to be a compelling reason not to televise it.

But if such cases are normally not televised, then I'd say, no, especially under these circumstances, there should be no television.

All things considered, and thanks to media mercenarism, it would be really dumb to televise an event that could likely trigger a riot.
 
Ontologuy said:
All things considered, and thanks to media mercenarism, it would be really dumb to televise an event that could likely trigger a riot.
Click to expand...

Do you really think this has to be televised in order to trigger a riot?
 
Ontologuy said:
I haven't gotten into this topic much, as there's just a lot of conflicting info being bantered about.

However, if cases involving the charges against Zimmerman normally get televised, then there needs to be a compelling reason not to televise it.

But if such cases are normally not televised, then I'd say, no, especially under these circumstances, there should be no television.

All things considered, and thanks to media mercenarism, it would be really dumb to televise an event that could likely trigger a riot.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking that if it is not televised, and the jury comes down with an unpopular verdict, then that might cause a riot. Based ignorance of the facts.

Of course, there will always be some who will believe what they want to believe regardless, but most people I think are reasonable enough to not riot once they know all the evidence, and weigh what they thought they knew with what they now know.
 
radcen said:
Should the George Zimmerman trial be televised?

I do not start yet another GZ thread lightly, but I see a great deal of conflicting information out there... on both sides... and I'm thinking that televising the trial would actually be a public service. Then, ALL the evidence that will be actually presented will be full public knowledge and there will be a whole lot less guessing, which could potentially lead to civil unrest, which I would like to avoid.
Click to expand...

Making the trial public will not make people not want to riot. It won't matter if experts come out say because those who are convinced Zimmerman is guilty won't care what experts say. Human garbage will use this as an excuse to riot just like the human garbage in Britain and Los Angeles did.
 
I haven't followed this extremely overreported story that much, but I'd have to say...

HELL no.
 
PerfectStorm said:
Do you really think this has to be televised in order to trigger a riot?
Click to expand...
If televised and is decided in Zimmerman's favor, the longer potential rioters en masse were subjected to the whole thing together, the more emotionally stimulated they all would be right before the verdict is read, and thus the more that would contribute to a greater extent of the scope and degree of the riot.

If all potential rioters could do was wait for a verdict to be reported, there would be less "en masse" effect, less heightened emotion erupting onto the streets, and the extent and scope of whatever riot might occur in places would be considerably less.

The last thing we would want to do is make this trial an episode of reality TV.
 
The people who are obsessed with this case have already decided "guilt" or "innocence" without a trial. Televising it won't change any minds. People will ignore or dispute evidence against the position they have married, and declare evidence for the position they have married as "proof" they are "right". No trial, no verdict, nothing will ever change the minds of these people.

Therefore, I vote not only no televising what will certainly be a media circus, but HELL NO to televising it.

Those on both sides who plan to riot will do so, no matter what.
 
There is no way to intelligently say what I am about to say, and still convey my thoughts in a manner which will be understood to the audience I address. I will say this then in the simplest terms possible.

You nosey arse people, so deeply buried in the arse of your television screen, need to give it a rest.
Reports of the trial will be readily available to all those with a 2nd education and the willingness to READ!!!!
This constant urge to turn high profile crime cases into soap opera daily is sickening.

To answer your question, no it should not.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
 
Im against any trials being televised.....I believe it makes some lawyers and judges do what they might not without knowing they are being scrutinized by millions...I believe Judge Ito in the simpson trial was scared to death to treat the defense like he should have because of tv..trials are lifechangers for people,they shouldnt be entertainment
 
No: What's the point of televising a trial? :confused:
 
No need to sensationalize this more then it already is....don't put the trial on television for the court of public opinion.
 
No, it shouldn't be televised. There's been enough sensationalizing of the event already.
 
I believe the Zimmerman story should be beamed as a 24/7 news feed directly into our heads.

Oh wait, it effectively already is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom