At 3/27/12 02:14 PM, HiryuGouki wrote: You all don't get why people are so upset. Trayvon was unarmed. There was no need to pull a gun on a teenager, who only went to go get a pack of skittles and a bottle of water. His crime WILL NOT go unpunished. He killed someone outside of Florida's self-defense law.

It's only self defense when Zimmerman does it. But when Martin retaliates against a crazed stalker with a gun, suddenly he's the aggressor and Zimmerman has the right to defend himself. Zimmerman supporters have this twisted double standard about self defense. It only becomes self defense when a punch of thrown. And Martin automatically threw the first punch. However, if an armed stalker is threatening your life with a gun, it's not self defense to try to stop him. And you deserve to be shot for doing so.

Piggy backing off of this, did you guys see Jasiri X's "A Song for Trayvon":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jOahR Ytw3lo

"George Zimmerman didn't take his Ritalin drunk off adrenaline says he
making a citizens arrest
Trayvon looks at him vexxed "I just walked to the
store nothing more nothing less"

Look, it doesn't matter if Zimmerman is the Grand Wizard of the KKK, it doesn't matter if he followed Martin around in his truck and asked him questions, it doesn't matter if the police dispatcher said he didn't have to follow him. All that matters is whether shooting Martin was a legitimate act of self-defense.
You may not like how Zimmerman profiled Martin or tried to play cop, but if you're going to get upset about bigotry and idiocy, what Zimmerman did lies at near the bottom of an infinitely long list.
The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman suffered a broken nose and Martin repeatedly slammed his head into the ground. Striking the head like that can be fatal, and anyone would be well within his rights to stop that attack with deadly force.
Even if Zimmerman shoved Martin first, it's still a legitimate case of self-defense. Pushes are not life-threatening attacks, which means Martin's response was an overreaction.
The only way it wasn't a case of self-defense is if Zimmerman pulled a gun first or if he shot Martin after he had stopped attacking (not just paused to get another strike in). The nature of the wound, the position of the body, and witness testimony can attest to that, and in those respects I defer to the judgment of the police, whose job it is to investigate such things.
Not testing Zimmerman for drugs or letting him go home (which was presumably close by in the same neighboorhood) does not outweigh the fundamentals of the case.

At 3/27/12 03:34 PM, adrshepard wrote: Not testing Zimmerman for drugs or letting him go home

;;;
Today I read that Martin had been suspended from school because a baggie with residual traces of marijuanna had been found in his back pack.

For the authorities & a large number of other brain dead idiots in the US & Canada , that proves this guy was no good & got what he deserved !

Murdering a person for walking down the street , because he was black & now putting info like this out about the deceased.... is fucking wrong.

Not nearly as wrong as having the murderer still sleeping soundly in his own bed...but i'm a conspiracy nutbar what would I know about common decency & human dignity !

At 3/26/12 11:07 PM, RacistBassist wrote: They don't wish him to, but it is also not an active order to stand down.

You do realize a 911 dispatcher has no authority to order anyone to do anything right? The dispatcher in question probably felt she was telling him to stop as clearly as possible.

A lot of cops also don't want you to fight back a lot of the time but instead run, but that's also not an order.

Relevance?

There is a huge difference between the two.

There is. One of the principal differences is one has the authority to do what Zimmerman did, the other doesn't. Guess which one Zimmerman belonged to?

Nothing. Zimm was following. Didn't try to confront.

Zimm had no right to follow/chase. Zero. By following/chasing, it can be inferred he was at the least WILLING to confront, if not actively seeking a confrontation.

It implies running after.

It actually doesn't according to the dictionary definition of a later reply to you.

Following in his truck. Following. Not trying to confront.

You keep missing the part where he has absolutely ZERO authority or legal right to be doing that. You also absolve him of the fact that any confrontation would result from the chain of causality that begins with his decision to follow/chase without said authority or right.

So basically it ends up with Trayvon having more of a right to be in the neighborhood, so he can just attack him?

If you completely didn't understand what I was saying and made some stuff up in your head? Yeah, sure, it could go that way.

But in the real world of what I was actually saying? I'm saying you've got a private citizen who has decided to chase another private citizen, with two deadly weapons in his possession (his truck, his gun) and when they reach a piece of private property that is neither citizen's residence, the chased confronts the chaser. Honestly, if Martin had survived the encounter, it seems to me he'd have a better defense under Stand Your Ground then Zimmerman could ever hope to.

Reports of the time spent following differ, but most indicate it at around one block.

Doesn't matter, he has no right to follow Martin. This is the critical point that overrides all this hair splitting you try to do.

Yes, and I've had people get road rage on me since we were going the same way. Therefore, they can attack me right?

The two situations are nowhere near comparable. You can't compare apples to oranges, though you seem bound and determined to try.

7:00 PM. Hardly middle of the night like reported. Yes, I believe Zimmerman should be brought under scrutiny for following, but remember, he was the one attacked.

That is not proven. But even if he did, that attack would have occurred as a result of his unlawful decision to follow Martin with two deadly weapons. Again, if Martin lives, he's got a slam dunk defense under Stand Your Ground against Zimmerman based on the emerging facts so far.

Zimmerman clearly believed this kid was scoping places out to commit a crime.

So what? He's not a cop, he's not a profiler, he's got NO AUTHORITY to do what he did.

He was trying to prevent it. He did not block him off in his car and attack him, he called 9-11 and followed.

He never should of followed him, he had NO RIGHT OR AUTHORITY TO FOLLOW!! This is why all your arguments will continue to fall to pieces, because of this fact. He has no right or business following this kid, none. He violated the rules of his own volunteer group by doing so, if not the law in general.

Uh, he does have the right to be armed, and he was on the phone with police.

Uh, no, 911 is not the police. My brother is a 911 dispatcher, but not a police officer. The two work together, but are not the same. I never said he didn't have a right to be armed, just that he had no right to do what he did, especially while armed.

He did nothing illegal, nor did he violate any rights.

This is so flat out wrong it's insane. But again, a black kid gets shot, a guy with "Racist" in his username defends the shooter...I shouldn't be shocked.

It's perfectly legal and moral to carry a gun, and following criminals through the neighborhood but not going up to them is perfectly within the rights.

Except that it well and truly is not. Unless you can show me a law which says you can. Also when did you magically find evidence saying Martin WAS a criminal? Because if you have some irrefutable proof, please stop talking about it on an internet forum and contact the county prosecutor in Sanford.

Cool. My grandparents were part of the watch. Didn't stop him from being packing. Considering that, you know, criminals don't take kindly to people reporting them.

Were they in THIS neighborhood watch? Because if they were, and they did what Zimmerman did, then they would have broke the rules and guidelines of the watch like Zimmerman did.

The lady that disputed it did NOT see it go down. She said she believed it didn't. Yes, there should be an investigation, but a hit by the BP is a little much.

The BP? Does BP stand for "Black Person"? If so, why does he have to be identified by his race?

Second, it's more then one person disputing Zimmerman you know, right?

Yeah, and who was the first to exchange words?

It doesn't matter because he had NO LEGAL RIGHT TO FOLLOW/CHASE THIS KID!!! Who confronts who is fairly irrelevant when the whole situation could have been avoided if Zimmerman stopped following when 911 told him he wasn't required to do so.

He's the neighbor watch. It's what he does. He did so at a distance.

That is NOT what the neighborhood watch does! EVERY article on this, EVERY person within that particular watch who was interviewed corroborates that fact! He had NO business or right doing what he did. The end!

Nowhere did he break any law.

I fully believe he did, or at the least the law isn't protecting him on chasing some kid because he thinks he's up to no good. Show me the law that says he can.

Seriously, find me the law where he isn't allowed to get out of his truck.

That's a sin of omission and you know it.

Find me the law that says he isn't allowed to be on the phone with police trying to get them on the scene.

Again, convenient omissions. You know damn well where he steps outside of the bounds of what he is legally allowed to do is.

He really did a great job attempting to evade the 250 IB overweight man.

He did until he decided to try and find out why this guy was following him. Then we have someone pushing someone, and a gun shot (based off what Martin's g/f is testifying to).

The scenario where all testimony from eye witnesses corroborate Zimmerman? That scenario?

Oh that is a total lie and you know it. Don't discuss things if you don't want to do it honestly.

What did he do?

He chased a private citizen with two deadly weapons prompting a confrontation that resulted in the other citizen dying. That is what he did. You keep omitting this from almost all your argumentation.

Who Trayvon did not know was armed.

How do you know what Trayvon knew or didn't know, and when he did or didn't know it? I sure don't, I'm going to make an educated guess you don't either.

Either way, even if it was Zimmerman attacking, which I highly doubt, Trayvon forfeited all claim of self defense by bashing his head against the ground.

Except it doesn't based on Florida's version of Stand Your Ground. Martin would have been defending himself in a situation where he felt threatened. You know, the defense Zimmerman is trying to use?

I'd call i following.

Well, the dictionary calls it chasing. Guess which one I go with?

Trayvon turned around and engaged. That's pretty clear intent to confront.

He turned around and verbally engaged, the rest is conjecture. Also Zimmerman still is the ultimate cause because this results from his original decision to chase. If Martin had lived, and Zimmerman pressed charges, I'm almost 100% confident the case would have been tossed because Zimmerman's decisions directly lead to the confrontation.

At 3/27/12 09:40 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

He did nothing illegal, nor did he violate any rights.

This is so flat out wrong it's insane. But again, a black kid gets shot, a guy with "Racist" in his username defends the shooter...I shouldn't be shocked.

As long as Zimmerman didn't try to detain Martin or make threats, he did nothing illegal. There's no law saying you can't ask someone what he is doing in a neighboorhood.

At 3/27/12 09:58 PM, adrshepard wrote: As long as Zimmerman didn't try to detain Martin or make threats, he did nothing illegal. There's no law saying you can't ask someone what he is doing in a neighboorhood.

Yes, cause the uproar here is 100% about Zimmerman asking Martin what he was doing, and not about Zimmerman shooting Martin...

At 3/27/12 10:27 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Yes, cause the uproar here is 100% about Zimmerman asking Martin what he was doing, and not about Zimmerman shooting Martin...

.

The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman suffered a broken nose and Martin repeatedly slammed his head into the ground. Striking the head like that can be fatal, and anyone would be well within his rights to stop that attack with deadly force.

I call so much bull on that. Proof please.

At 3/28/12 10:13 AM, Korriken wrote: Had treyvon been white and Zimmerman been black, there wouldn't even be any outrage.

Had Treyvon been white and Zimmerman black, Zimmerman would be in jail on murder charges.

At 3/28/12 10:48 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

Had Treyvon been white and Zimmerman black, Zimmerman would be in jail on murder charges.

Except that Zimmerman is actually Hispanic and you people didn't start calling him "white" until after he shot a black kid.

At 3/27/12 10:27 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 3/27/12 09:58 PM, adrshepard wrote: As long as Zimmerman didn't try to detain Martin or make threats, he did nothing illegal. There's no law saying you can't ask someone what he is doing in a neighboorhood.

Yes, cause the uproar here is 100% about Zimmerman asking Martin what he was doing, and not about Zimmerman shooting Martin...

Great contribution, Camarohusky. With so many people using the common sense of your average Afghan peasant to rush to judgment, your failure to understand even a 100-word post is refreshing.

At 3/28/12 09:23 AM, HiryuGouki wrote:

The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman suffered a broken nose and Martin repeatedly slammed his head into the ground. Striking the head like that can be fatal, and anyone would be well within his rights to stop that attack with deadly force.

I call so much bull on that. Proof please.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/27/george-zimm erman-s-account-of-fight-with-trayvon-martin-questioned.html

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayv on-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-u narmed-black-teenager

Read please.

At 3/28/12 02:28 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

Wounds can be self-inflicted. Also, was there blood on the ground where Zimmerman's head was supposedly slammed against? And I thought there were grass stains on the back of his jacket... would your head really bleed if it was slammed into the grass on a rainy day?

Even if you ignore the eyewitness who reportedly saw Martin on top of Zimmerman beating him up, it's doubtful that Zimmerman would have had the presence of mind to have broken his own nose, cut the back of his head, and rubbed grass stains into his shirt seconds after killing someone, or without anyone noticing.

Zimmerman's story is directly contradicted by almost every witness there, as well as the fact that Martin is almost half Zimmerman's weight. There's no way that scrawny little kid could have done that.

He wasn't a "scrawny little kid" any more than Zimmerman was a muscular behemoth. Sometimes big people are weak and go down easy, sometimes lighter people have a lot of fight in them. But that's irrelevant. According to at least one witness, Zimmerman was on the ground crying out while Martin was top of him laying blows.

At 3/28/12 03:04 PM, adrshepard wrote: Great contribution, Camarohusky. With so many people using the common sense of your average Afghan peasant to rush to judgment, your failure to understand even a 100-word post is refreshing.

Your post is trying to deflect the issue here. The issue is that Zimmerman shot Martin. Don't try to make Zimmerman's reasons for confronting Martin an issue, cause they aren't. Not to say those reasons don't have a part to play in the story, but don't go around trying to make that the central issue.

RWG said it best in that the failure here is of the police to do any sort of investigation on par with a possible murder shooting. They took a little bit of evidence, Zimmerman's word, and then decided to completely drop it. This isn't a minor theft, someone was shot and killed. A good investigation is not only warranted it is damn near required.

At 3/28/12 03:02 PM, Memorize wrote: Except that Zimmerman is actually Hispanic and you people didn't start calling him "white" until after he shot a black kid.

Show his picture and say the name "George Zimmerman" and 99 out of 100 will say he's white. No one would have called him a latino until he shot the black kid.

At 3/28/12 01:10 PM, RacistBassist wrote:

That the whole "we don't need you to do that" isn't relevant either?

It is, because it makes it thoroughly clear that there was no reason for Zimmerman to follow Martin and get close enough to him for a physical altercation to start other than he felt like it.

Authority? Everyone has the authority to call the police on someone and keep a LoS on them.

He doesn't have the authority to follow him into the backyard of somebody else and trespass on their property. Where does that fall under Observe and Report?

Please point me to the law where it says somebody isn't allowed to follow somebody they believe is committing a crime while on the phone with police.

Onto the private property of somebody else?

When has chasing ever been used in a context outside of long distances or fast speeds?

In the actual definition of the word. He chased him, you can't wriggle yourself out of a dictionary definition just because you don't like it, that's not how it works.

He has every right to. The chain of causality is such a fickle thing. People only go as far back as they want to. Shit, given causality, we can argue that him making his lunch the way he did caused the event.

You're grasping at straws, and you're well aware of that. Every decision Zimmerman made after notifying the police was one that intentionally placed him in possible danger and contradicted everything Neighborhood Watch actually does, resulting in a fatal shooting that could and should have been avoided.

Please point out what you meant, since everybody is assuming Zimmerman can't be in the neighborhood, but Trayvon can.

Who's assuming this? They both had the right to be where they were. And neither of them had the right to enter somebody's private property. However, just because Martin broke the law and trespassed into somebody's backyard does not give Zimmerman any legal right to do the same.

Martin would have an easier time defending himself in court if the two were charged with trespassing, because he could build a reasonable defense off of "I thought I was going to get shot".

Everything the pro Trayvon side has is conjecture. The only thing we have is Zimmerman breaking no laws, a cut away if we disregard Zimm, then Trayvon pounding his head against the ground.

....the...pro Trayvon side? Are you seriously treating this discussion as some sort of My Team VS. Your Team bullshit?

What the fuck is wrong with you, kid.

This may come as a shocker, but nowhere in what Zimmerman did was anything illegal.

Outlined this in a couple responses below.

Good thing violating the watch rules is irrelevant when discussing real laws.

Not really, because as I've already pointed out to you, intentionally interjecting yourself into a potentially harmful situation in order to incite a conflict is indeed against the law, albeit difficult to prove in court, and it can be argued rather reasonably that it appears that Zimmerman may have indeed been doing exactly that.

And Trayvon had no legal right to confront somebody and bash their against the ground. Next time I have somebody following me for a block on the phone, I'm going to attack them and say I did what Trayvon did. See how that works out.

He could have been verbally threatened, Zimmerman could have initiated the physical altercation etc etc. You can't know how it went down for certain yet you seem rather confident in asserting that you do.

Neighborhood watch watches for criminals and calls the police. Zimmerman did this. He just decided to follow and stay on the phone.

After being told it was not necessary for the police to do their job and ignoring the fact that Neighborhood Watch groups usually ask you not to do this. He also confronted him which is not part of Neighborhood Watch and followed him onto the premises of another person's property, which again, is directly contradictory to Observe and Report.

That's not how laws work. Show me the one that outlaws what he did.

Armed trespassing onto private property. Florida law states that you are not actually committing trespassing unless you are notified that your presence is not wanted on the property, however there is a clause in the law that allows for retro-active accusation of trespassing i.e "This man was snooping through my backyard while I was at work and I did not want him there".

So there's one, if the owners of the property and the Sanford police wished to purse it.

I really hate the "white aggressor + black victim = racism" the media carries. Nobody cares when people of the same ethnicity shoot each other, but when its white vs. black its like the Civil War all over again.

At 3/28/12 07:35 PM, CritcalOne wrote: I really hate the "white aggressor + black victim = racism" the media carries. Nobody cares when people of the same ethnicity shoot each other, but when its white vs. black its like the Civil War all over again.

Generally I agree but in this one particular case the racism is pretty clear.

At 3/28/12 07:35 PM, CritcalOne wrote: I really hate the "white aggressor + black victim = racism" the media carries. Nobody cares when people of the same ethnicity shoot each other, but when its white vs. black its like the Civil War all over again.

Racially motivated murders (or all hate crimes of all violence levels) go far beyond the simple act of killing. Such acts send a message that the member of that status is not welcome within the community and that dangerous and lethal force will be untilized to enforce this message. Such murders are nothing less than domestic terrorism.

Let's not forget, just because someone of one race commits a murder against someone of another race doesn't make it a hate crime. There has to be the racial motivation. While there's enough evidence to get past a JOA on that here, there isn't enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was. (Sounds akward talking about trial stuff, because clearly Florida doesn't think this is even worth a serious investigation, let alone a trial.)

At 3/28/12 07:35 PM, CritcalOne wrote: I really hate the "white aggressor + black victim = racism" the media carries. Nobody cares when people of the same ethnicity shoot each other, but when its white vs. black its like the Civil War all over again.

Fucking goons.

And I mean that in a positive way!

Here's my take on the whole thing:

Nobody knows what happened, nobody saw it except the guy who killed Trayvon. He was the only guy who TRULY knows what happened. He says it's self defense. He could be lying, he couldn't be. The one thing that I think gives Zimmerman a little bit of credibility, though, is the way Trayvon's family is handling it. The guy had no prior indication of racism and he was also on the town watch. I just think that because the killer was white, the racism card might have been an easy way out for his family in order to immediately place massive suspicion on Zimmerman.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting-
witnesses/index.html

And so the plot thickens...

Zimmerman sure looks he got the shit kicked out of him in these videos.

At 3/28/12 11:35 PM, Spretznaz wrote:

The guy had no prior indication of racism and he was also on the town watch.

According to his neighbor's and other members of the Neighborhood watch, Zimmerman had made a habit of telling people to be alert and cautious of "young black men".

I just think that because the killer was white

You mean the hispanic son of a Peruvian immigrant.

the racism card might have been an easy way out for his family in order to immediately place massive suspicion on Zimmerman.

How the Martin family is responding to what happened holds no bearing whatsoever on what actually occurred.

At 3/28/12 11:35 PM, Spretznaz wrote: The guy had no prior indication of racism and he was also on the town watch.

So the 40 something calls he made to report suspicious looking black men shouldn't be taken as an indication of anything?

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68912193/News/Pa st-911-call-George-Zimmerman-reports-two-black-males#pl-6277 3735

At 3/28/12 11:44 PM, Camarohusky wrote: And so the plot thickens...

Zimmerman sure looks he got the shit kicked out of him in these videos.

Oh my god, looks like he got his ass more beat up than G-Fresh.

It's amazing that he can even breathe with his nose bashed in like that. Breaking your nose is a bitch.

At 3/28/12 11:44 PM, Camarohusky wrote: And so the plot thickens...

Zimmerman sure looks he got the shit kicked out of him in these videos.

Damn... Look at that weak, massively overweight bruised and battered man.... Poor bastard never stood a chance.

At 3/28/12 06:16 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

Show his picture and say the name "George Zimmerman" and 99 out of 100 will say he's white. No one would have called him a latino until he shot the black kid.

I thought he was latino the first time I saw him.

But I guess if he's not your shade of "brown", then he can't be hispanic, isn't that right, you racist?

At 3/29/12 02:10 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 3/28/12 06:16 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

Show his picture and say the name "George Zimmerman" and 99 out of 100 will say he's white. No one would have called him a latino until he shot the black kid.

I thought he was latino the first time I saw him.

But I guess if he's not your shade of "brown", then he can't be hispanic, isn't that right, you racist?

He looks hispanic to me. But he's half white and half hispanic, so shouldn't that be expected? I don't see why people are debating whether he's white or hispanic. He's both. Although technically, hispanics are a mix of whites and indigenous people of the Americas so calling him hispanic would be more accurate in my opinion. Either way he's a mix of the two.

At 3/29/12 10:04 AM, Korriken wrote: depends. we'll have to wait and see.

you'd be amazed at what a "scrawny kid" can do.

I take it you missed the new video of Zimmerman from after he was viciously beaten to a bloody pulp by Martin.

Luckily, Zimmerman is Wolverine, so all the damage that Martin did was healed up by the time this video was captured.

At 3/25/12 10:17 AM, Camarohusky wrote: Could get ugly? This thing got ugly the minute Zimmerman went home without any investigation.

Florida's law is broken. Self defense is an affirmative defense that needs to be proven by the defendant to the finder of fact just like the prosecution (I'm blanking on the burden needed, but my gut says beyond a reasonable doubt.) This would be akin to all gun crimes being perse murder and skipping the trial and the jury and sending the shooter straight to prison.

The fact that it was white on black makes the outcry even worse. (Yes, I know he's technically partially hispanic, but look at his picture, and his name. He's about as hispanic as Taco Bell is authentic Mexican food.)

ITT Guilty until proven innocent, racial profiling, ignoring black panthers attempt at vigilantism.

Does anyone spouting off here actually know jack shit about this? Or do we presume that it's more likely that the Florida police department are transparently racist rather than the possibility that we don't know what we're talking about?

At 3/29/12 02:10 AM, Memorize wrote: then he can't be hispanic, isn't that right, you racist?

Good ol' Memorize: shallow as a puddle and insulting to boot.

Based on the video his skin tone looks a good bit darker than the mugshot the news had been showing.

However, based on the mugshot, on first glance, combined with his British first name and German last name, gives the first impression of him being white.