Quote :

"he said Trayvon was a criminal if he threw a punch. not if he threw the first punch. he's a criminal if he threw a punch."

Really???

Quote :

" Going on Zimmermans claims, and since we will more than likely never know who threw the first punch, but if it was Trayvon, he goes from being innocent to criminal the moment that first punch lands."

He said "first punch" twice in what you quoted. He said we may never know who threw the first punch, but if it was Trayvon...

Where are you getting lost on this, or are you being obtuse?

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM. Reason : Fuck an iPhone!]

4/11/2012 9:48:14 PM

^he's being obtuse.

The statements were that Trayvon was at fault if he attacked Martin first. Martin following him does not make it ok for him to start swinging (if that is what happened).

I may have missed it earlier in the thread, but how far is the store from Martin's house and where was he in relation to those places when this happened?

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 9:54 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 9:53:44 PM

Quote :

"Martin following him does not make it ok for him to start swinging (if that is what happened). "

That wouldn't make it okay for Zimmerman to kill him either.

4/11/2012 9:59:12 PM

Quote :

"That wouldn't make it okay for Zimmerman to kill him either. "

If he feared for his life it would. Hands and Feet can constitute deadly weapons under certain circumstances.

4/11/2012 10:00:51 PM

Quote :

"OBTUSE"

4/11/2012 10:01:03 PM

Quote :

"If he feared for his life it would. "

Can that logic not apply to Trayvon?

4/11/2012 10:01:51 PM

^Apples and Oranges. Being followed /= beating the shit out of someone.

4/11/2012 10:02:30 PM

Throwing the first punch does also not equal beating the shit out of someone.

4/11/2012 10:03:19 PM

Quote :

"If he feared for his life it would. Hands and Feet can constitute deadly weapons under certain circumstances."

1) Zimmerman has hands and feet
2) Zimmerman has gun

And Zimmerman wasn't hurt that badly.

Either Martin was a giant pussy, or Zimmerman's story doesn't add up (his injuries aren't all that don't make sense about his account).

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:04 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:03:24 PM

^^ Sure. Do you know exactly what happened? Neither do I. That's what makes this whole thread retarded.

^Relevance?

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:04 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:04:21 PM

Like I said earlier...

I think this is all going to go back to what's seen as escalating this conflict, and what the definition of "provocation" will be in this situation.

4/11/2012 10:05:21 PM

^^The point is, that knowing who threw the first punch isn't determinative in whether or not there's a valid claim of self defense, as was implied.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:05 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:05:40 PM

^and that's where I was disagreeing. If Martin attacked Zimmerman and then got shot..then it's Martin's fault.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:09 PM. Reason : idiots keep derailing.]

4/11/2012 10:09:17 PM

Quote :

"If he feared for his life it would. Hands and Feet can constitute deadly weapons under certain circumstances."

what if Trayvon feared for his life because some random guy was following him in the dark and then got out of a car and started chasing him?

4/11/2012 10:10:40 PM

^^yeah, everyone who throws a punch deserves to get shot, .

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:13 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2012 10:13:10 PM

We know:

1) Kid was unarmed, walking on the street, minding his own business, shot dead. Police brought no charges, lead investigator felt charges were warranted and that gunman was lying. Kid has no recorded history of violent behavior.

2) The gunman called police to report a "suspicious person" that wasn't actually doing anything suspicious, calls this kid a "fucking punk" based on this judgement, and tells 911 operator "'they' always get away," what exactly Zimmerman thought Martin was getting away with, only Zimmerman knows. This same gentleman assaulted a police officer in his past, and has a charge for domestic violence.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:13 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:13:15 PM

^^^This will be the third time I've said it, but being followed is not a good reason to attack someone.

4/11/2012 10:15:35 PM

but it is a good reason to feel threatened. and if that person then catches up with you, what would you say is the proper response? let them do whatever the fuck they want?

4/11/2012 10:16:35 PM

Yes? Then you have cause for self defense.

4/11/2012 10:17:27 PM

oh but you DO have self defense if you follow someone and then shoot them

got it

4/11/2012 10:19:05 PM

^really?

4/11/2012 10:20:03 PM

he was told not to follow the kid, but he chose to ignore common sense and killed the kid. now he has to live with the consequences. even if he gets life in prison, he wins because the victim is dead for no reason.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:22 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2012 10:22:14 PM

yes. really.

the law can't be so black and white that it only looks at who threw the first punch. i'm so sick of that stupid argument.

i am torn on this anyways. i dont think it was right for zimmerman to follow, however, if his head was being banged into the ground then i think he had a right to use his gun. so i'm waiting to see the evidence come out.

and ive already expressed itt how i feel about people following me.

4/11/2012 10:22:23 PM

^^ Nobody's saying that. They're saying that if someone punches/attacks you and you shoot them, that doesn't make you a criminal.

Quote :

"He intended to use deadly force if necessary, which is clear."

Shit, tons of people intend "to use deadly force if necessary". Not a crime, and in fact, a pretty reasonable stance.


Re: Casey Anthony, moron, it WAS right in a "universal", bigger picture way, in the sense that abiding by the rule of law rather than mob rule is where we want to be. Better to let one worthless bitch walk than take the opposite tack.

(I'm not convinced she was a murderer, anyway, although certainly a crazy bitch with no redeeming qualities other than being fairly trailer hot.)


In terms of this case, unless there is a LOT more to it than we've heard, there is no way in hell it's murder 2. It sounds to me that even manslaughter is likely a stretch, and there's a good chance that he didn't really do anything wrong other than maybe being a harassing busybody (which isn't a crime). If both he and Martin were in a public space, and he was just following Martin keeping an eye on him, and Martin instigated an altercation because he didn't like that...and then Zimmerman smoked him...well...that's a tragedy, but that would be Martin's own fault.

I'm not saying that's how it went down--but that's what Zimmerman claims, and it's a very plausible story.


How much Z was injured is utterly irrelevant.

4/11/2012 10:23:25 PM

It would appear as if roguewarrior is defending one person's right to stand their ground, while denying another's....


There's been an arrest.... I'm happy with that. You guys have fun in here.....

EMCE OUT!



[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:29 PM. Reason : escalation and provocation. define them?]

4/11/2012 10:24:51 PM

^depends on each person's definition of "reasonable belief of a threat" I guess.

also of course depends on the actual events which none of us know.

disclaimer: I've never proclaimed Zimmerman's innocence..just my opinion on the hypothetical that was brought up.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:31 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:29:26 PM

Quote :

"In terms of this case, unless there is a LOT more to it than we've heard, there is no way in hell it's murder 2. It sounds to me that even manslaughter is likely a stretch, and there's a good chance that he didn't really do anything wrong other than maybe being a harassing busybody (which isn't a crime). If both he and Martin were in a public space, and he was just following Martin keeping an eye on him, and Martin instigated an altercation because he didn't like that...and then Zimmerman smoked him...well...that's a tragedy, but that would be Martin's own fault. I'm not saying that's how it went down--but that's what Zimmerman claims, and it's a very plausible story."

There's a lot more to this story that Zimmerman's account, and pretty much all of what's known that's NOT Zimmerman's account casts doubt on his version of things.

Not to mention that the lead investigator wanted charges, and thought zimmerman was lying.

AND, it's perfectly reasonable and practically expected for Trayvon's parents to be extremely upset that their unarmed son otherwise minding his own business walking back from the store was profiled by Zimmerman, and ended up getting shot as a result of this profiling, and the cops did nothing.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:36:40 PM

Quote :

"In terms of this case, unless there is a LOT more to it than we've heard, there is no way in hell it's murder 2. It sounds to me that even manslaughter is likely a stretch, and there's a good chance that he didn't really do anything wrong other than maybe being a harassing busybody (which isn't a crime). If both he and Martin were in a public space, and he was just following Martin keeping an eye on him, and Martin instigated an altercation because he didn't like that...and then Zimmerman smoked him...well...that's a tragedy, but that would be Martin's own fault. I'm not saying that's how it went down--but that's what Zimmerman claims, and it's a very plausible story. How much Z was injured is utterly irrelevant."

Yay.

Add to the list another person that understands whats going on with this situation.

And using common sense and logic.

+1 for you sir!

4/11/2012 10:39:32 PM

tacolu logic:

- person admits they haven't been following the case closely, makes qualified statement based solely on the attackers account, tacolu congratulates this person for knowing what's going on.

- well respected, principled attorney spends weeks examining all public and non-publicly known elements of the case, brings charges; doesn't know what she's doing.

4/11/2012 10:50:10 PM

Quote :

"AND, it's perfectly reasonable and practically expected for Trayvon's parents to be extremely upset that their unarmed son otherwise minding his own business walking back from the store was profiled by Zimmerman, and ended up getting shot as a result of this profiling, and the cops did nothing. "

Yes, I would expect them to be upset. I would expect anyone to be upset if their son was killed no matter what the circumstances are.

Once again, whether you think it is or not, walking in the fucking rain at night in a hoodie is suspicious to some people. And again, if you will listen to Zimmerman's 911 call, he didn't volunteer what color Trayvon was, and only said so when asked. And even then he said "he looks black" with some doubt in his mind.

If he had been on the 911 call and been "Yeah there is some suspicious black dude/nigger/coon/etc... who looks like he is up to no good, I would get your point."

Zimmerman CLAIMS that Trayvon was walking around stopping and looking at houses and acting suspicious.

Which, coupled with the fact that Trayvon dables in drugs, AND had been in trouble in the past for vandalism, gives a little more credence to Zimmerman's claims that he was acting suspicious.

Is this grounds for shooting someone? Of course not. That's not why or when Trayvon was shot.

Trayvon was shot during a physical altercation.

People get in trouble or questioned by the cops all the time for supposedly "minding their own business" because believe it or not, people can look suspicious by doing things that seem normal.

The fact that Zimmerman called 911 to report a suspicious person is neither illegal or a way to show premeditation or provoking an incident.

Neither is following someone for the purpose of gathering information to give to the cops. This isn't instigating anything.

It is perfectly legal to follow someone.




The fucked up part is that we will more than likely never know the most important part of this case.

Who confronted who, and who threw the first punch.

Also ,we will probably never know for sure to what extent Zimmerman was actually threatened and felt the need to use deadly force.

He CLAIMS Trayvon was trying to get his gun. Which can basically not be proven or disproven.

Basically, as horrible as it is, he isn't going to be convicted of a serious crime such as murder 2 if they can't actually prove who started it and if Trayvon actually went for his gun.

People don't get convicted on a "maybe"

A "maybe" is reasonable doubt and is all you need for a not guilty verdict.

4/11/2012 10:53:02 PM

Quote :

"Zimmerman CLAIMS that Trayvon was walking around stopping and looking at houses and acting suspicious. Which, coupled with the fact that Trayvon dables in drugs, AND had been in trouble in the past for vandalism, gives a little more credence to Zimmerman's claims that he was acting suspicious."

Both of these statements are completely wrong.

It's irrelevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing, because it turned out Zimmerman was wrong. If a dumb person thinks dumb things and acts on this, we don't, and shouldn't excuse them when they are wrong.

And things that Zimmerman couldn't possibly know don't give credence to his claims he was acting suspicious. When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior.


[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:01 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 10:58:10 PM

Quote :

"tacolu logic: - person admits they haven't been following the case closely, makes qualified statement based solely on the attackers account, tacolu congratulates this person for knowing what's going on. - well respected, principled attorney spends weeks examining all public and non-publicly known elements of the case, brings charges; doesn't know what she's doing."

You know why she more than likely got rid of the grand jury?

Because she knew they weren't going to indict him.

So, to avoid the shit storm that would have come from that, she chooses to arrest him and charge him with something that she knows he will not be found guilty of.

Like Duke said, we know a good bit of the evidence so far, so unless there is some over the top nail in the coffin piece we don't know about, there is no way in hell based on the legal definition in Florida of Murder 2 that he ever gets convicted of that.

If you knew you had to do this in order to avoid another Rodney King incident, you'd probably do it too.


Based on what we know right now, and assuming like we say, there isn't some more damning evidence, any half assed defense attorney has MORE than enough to create reasonable doubt.

4/11/2012 10:59:08 PM

Quote :

"So, to avoid the shit storm that would have come from that, she chooses to arrest him and charge him with something that she knows he will not be found guilty of. "

Yeah, there are specific prosecutor rules of professional conduct that are supposed to prevent prosecutors from bringing charges for a crime if there's not enough evidence to find him guilty.

4/11/2012 11:01:06 PM

Quote :

"Trayvon was shot during a physical altercation. People get in trouble or questioned by the cops all the time for supposedly "minding their own business" because believe it or not, people can look suspicious by doing things that seem normal. "

This is true, and if Zimmerman 1) was a cop 2) was dressed as a cop 3) showed a badge 4) followed the same procedure a cop would have [note: this is impossible, because he doesn't have the tools a cop would have had] then i would 100% support him. None of these things are true.

The irony is that for Zimmerman's assaulting an officer charge, he assaulted an undercover cop at a party, and his defense was "i didn't know he was a cop." LOL.

Quote :

"The fucked up part is that we will more than likely never know the most important part of this case. Who confronted who, and who threw the first punch. Also ,we will probably never know for sure to what extent Zimmerman was actually threatened and felt the need to use deadly force. He CLAIMS Trayvon was trying to get his gun. Which can basically not be proven or disproven. "

None of these things are true either. If i didn't know you have been posting ITT from page 1, i'd say you haven't been following this thread at all.


[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:03 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 11:02:40 PM

Quote :

"supposed to"

and a revoked license is supposed to keep someone from driving.

4/11/2012 11:02:42 PM

Quote :

"Both of these statements are completely wrong. It's irrelevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing, because it turned out Zimmerman was wrong. If a dumb person thinks dumb things and acts on this, we don't, and shouldn't excuse them when they are wrong. And things that Zimmerman couldn't possibly know don't give credence to his claims he was acting suspicious. When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior. "

Oh they are wrong??

Really?

Does Zimmerman CLAIM in the 911 call that Trayvon is acting suspicious? YES

Does Trayvon have a checkered past of doing criminal things? YES

So when someone makes a claim that someone looks like they are acting suspicious, and people call him out on it, then we learn that the person in question has done things in the past that are illegal, it give the person making the claims a little more credibility of being correct.

So, you are wrong in saying those two statements are completely wrong.

4/11/2012 11:02:43 PM

Quote :

"Does Zimmerman CLAIM in the 911 call that Trayvon is acting suspicious? YES "

A claim he isn't able to substantiate with any describable actions, that we know in hindsight was wrong.

So YES, what you said was 100% WRONG.

When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:07 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 11:04:43 PM

Quote :

"and a revoked license is supposed to keep someone from driving."

And there are consequences for both things...

4/11/2012 11:06:04 PM

Quote :

"So when someone makes a claim that someone looks like they are acting suspicious, and people call him out on it, then we learn that the person in question has done things in the past that are illegal, it give the person making the claims a little more credibility of being correct."

You're giving Zimmerman benefit of the doubt because of Martin's past actions, but you won't give Martin benefit of the doubt in spite of Zimmerman's own shady past?

4/11/2012 11:06:57 PM

Quote :

"Both of these statements are completely wrong. It's irrelevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing, because it turned out Zimmerman was wrong. If a dumb person thinks dumb things and acts on this, we don't, and shouldn't excuse them when they are wrong. And things that Zimmerman couldn't possibly know don't give credence to his claims he was acting suspicious. When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior. "

Oh they are wrong??

Really?

Does Zimmerman CLAIM in the 911 call that Trayvon is acting suspicious? YES

Does Trayvon have a checkered past of doing criminal things? YES

So when someone makes a claim that someone looks like they are acting suspicious, and people call him out on it, then we learn that the person in question has done things in the past that are illegal, it give the person making the claims a little more credibility of being correct.

So, you are wrong in saying those two statements are completely wrong.

Quote :

"It's irrelevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing, because it turned out Zimmerman was wrong. If a dumb person thinks dumb things and acts on this, we don't, and shouldn't excuse them when they are wrong."

How was he wrong?

Trayvon walking around at night in the rain stopping and looking at houses was suspicious to him. It's his view on the situation. He isn't wrong in thinking someone is suspicious for doing something.

Quote :

"And things that Zimmerman couldn't possibly know don't give credence to his claims he was acting suspicious. When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior. "

Once again, WALKING IN THE RAIN IN A HOODIE AT NIGHT STOPPING AND LOOKING AT HOUSES is suspicious to SOME PEOPLE.

Also, if I think I see a guy rape a girl at a party, and call the cops, and I call 911 and say "I think I just witnessed this guy raping this girl" and then the cops come and it gets leaked to the media, and everyone is like "Oh Bobby Joe would never rape anyone, he is a perfect model citizen, you are lying and a bigot, there is no way he could or would ever do that, you are totally wrong in your claims."

And everyone thinks I am a liar and don't beleive me.

Well then a week later, we find out that 10yrs ago, Bobby Joe was convicted of a rape, it gives a little more credence to my claims that "I saw Bobby Joe rapping someone"

Even though I had no clue that he had raped before.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:11 PM. Reason : l]

4/11/2012 11:08:50 PM

Apparently it's irrelevant that Zimmerman didn't describe any suspicious behavior to the 911 operator, has never in any of his accounts, leaked or otherwise, indicated any actual suspicious behavior on Martin's part, yet somehow to tacolu and only tacolu Martin MUST have been doing something suspicious.

He knows more about what Martin was doing that Zimmerman himself, I suppose.

4/11/2012 11:09:23 PM

Quote :

"And there are consequences for both things..."

One would almost certainly involve collusion. You obviously know way more about it than I do I just think that they may have made the decision based on public outrage and weighing the what they should do vs. what will keep people from going more ape than they've already gone.

4/11/2012 11:10:42 PM

Quote :

" How was he wrong? Trayvon walking around at night in the rain stopping and looking at houses was suspicious to him. It's his view on the situation. He isn't wrong in thinking someone is suspicious for doing something."

He was wrong, because Martin wasn't actually doing anything suspicious.

If a mad man thinks demons are coming out of his kids body, and murders his kid to get rid of the demons, this all seems perfectly reasonable to him. But thankfully, society doesn't weigh things this way, and doesn't excuse him for this. It's irrelevant if Zimmerman "felt" Martin was doing something suspicious, if he can't actually describe suspicious behavior, and we know in hind-sight that Martin was walking around with skittles and tea.

4/11/2012 11:12:44 PM

Quote :

"Apparently it's irrelevant that Zimmerman didn't describe any suspicious behavior to the 911 operator, has never in any of his accounts, leaked or otherwise, indicated any actual suspicious behavior on Martin's part, yet somehow to tacolu and only tacolu Martin MUST have been doing something suspicious. He knows more about what Martin was doing that Zimmerman himself, I suppose. "

Go listen to the 911 call you FUCKING IDIOT.

He says this kid is walking around, just stopping and staring at houses.

That is the suspicious behavior that he describes.

Coupled with the fact that it is raining, and it is night, most people don't go out to site see and look at houses that are in a condo complex where they all look the same either.


Here is the link if you need it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/16/trayvon-martin-911-audio-_n_1354909.html

First recording.


Let me quote it for you

"We've had some breakins in the neighborhood, and there is this real suspicious guy

He looks like he is up to no good, on drugs or something.

It's raining, and he is just out walking about.

Wearing a dark hoodie and jeans.

He is just staring and looking at all the houses.

Now he is just staring at me.

Now he is coming towards me.

He has his hand in his waistband.

Something is wrong with him, yep, he is coming to check me out.

He has something in his hands."


Yep, none of that is suspicious at all

Granted yes, some of that occurs AFTER the initial call.



And when he says "they always get away"

He is more than likely referring to the criminals involved in the recent breakins that he describes at the beginning of the call, and is not referring to "black people" like most want to think.

However, I do see your point in the differences in my description of the rape and what happened here, but I think you get the point I was trying to make, its not going to be exact.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:25 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2012 11:13:22 PM

Quote :

"Also, if I think I see a guy rape a girl at a party, and call the cops, and I call 911 and say "I think I just witnessed this guy raping this girl" and then the cops come and it gets leaked to the media, and everyone is like "Oh Bobby Joe would never rape anyone, he is a perfect model citizen, you are lying and a bigot, there is no way he could or would ever do that, you are totally wrong in your claims." And everyone thinks I am a liar and don't beleive me. Well then a week later, we find out that 10yrs ago, Bobby Joe was convicted of a rape, it gives a little more credence to my claims that "I saw Bobby Joe rapping someone" Even though I had no clue that he had raped before. "

This does in fact make sense.

But Zimmerman didn't say "i saw martin breaking into houses" or "i saw martin using drugs" or "i saw martin inject a needle into himself" or "I saw Martin rape someone" or any specific action. That fact that you say you SAW someone rape someone is an ENTIRELY different scenario.

Zimmerman didn't actually SEE anything. He FELT Martin was suspicious. Do you see the difference?

If Zimmerman saw Martin do something, ANYTHING, that normal humans don't do in the course of walking around at night, then you would have a point. But Zimmerman didn't actually see anything.

Ask yourself these questions...

What did Zimmerman mean when he called Martin a "fucking punk"? What had he actually seen Martin do at this point (hint: it's in the 911 call-- the answer is that he didn't actually see him do anything, he was pre-judging him for whatever reason).

What did Zimmerman mean when he said on the 911 call "they always get away..."? He, again, has pre-judged Martin at this point.

At no point in time did he ever describe, even when asked, what Martin was doing that was suspicious. Not on the 911 call, not in the leaked account, it's not in the police report.

4/11/2012 11:18:51 PM

Quote :

"He says this kid is walking around, just stopping and staring at houses."

Here's the transcript:
http://phoebe53.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/zimmerman-911-call-transcript-trayvon-martin/

There's nothing Zimmerman describes in that call that indicates suspicious behavior.

"
It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about.
...
He’s here now … he’s just staring.
...
Now he’s staring at me.
...
now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waist band.
...
he’s coming to check me out.

He’s got something in his hands.
...
He’s running [awawy from zimmerman] Down toward the other entrance of the neighborhood
...
"

So... LITERALLY, Zimmerman is calling 911 because Trayvon is looking at him, because he's looking at Trayvon.

This would be a comedy sketch, if it wasn't so tragic.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:25 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 11:22:04 PM

Let me quote it for you

"We've had some breakins in the neighborhood, and there is this real suspicious guy

He looks like he is up to no good, on drugs or something.

It's raining, and he is just out walking about.

Wearing a dark hoodie and jeans.

He is just staring and looking at all the houses.

Now he is just staring at me.

Now he is coming towards me.

He has his hand in his waistband.

Something is wrong with him, yep, he is coming to check me out.

He has something in his hands."


Yep, none of that is suspicious at all

Granted yes, some of that occurs AFTER the initial call.



And when he says "they always get away"

He is more than likely referring to the criminals involved in the recent breakins that he describes at the beginning of the call, and is not referring to "black people" like most want to think.

However, I do see your point in the differences in my description of the rape and what happened here, but I think you get the point I was trying to make, its not going to be exact.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:25 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2012 11:26:39 PM

Quote :

"Yep, none of that is suspicious at all "

Can you itemize which things that Martin was actually doing there you find suspicious? Because none of that is suspicious.

Quote :

"And when he says "they always get away" He is more than likely referring to the criminals involved in the recent breakins that he describes at the beginning of the call, and is not referring to "black people" like most want to think."

I wasn't suggesting he was referring to black people. But he thinks Trayvon is a criminal for no rational reason other than his physical appearance. This is profiling. And as we now know in hindsight, he assessment of Martin was incorrect.


[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:31 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 11:29:39 PM

Quote :

"The irony is that for Zimmerman's assaulting an officer charge, he assaulted an undercover cop at a party, and his defense was "i didn't know he was a cop." LOL. "

Actually, there was another case of this and I believe the ruling was in favor of the defendant.

I either read about in, funny enough, a book about murder that I have or on the internet.

Basically, a guy had been charged with killing a cop.

There was an undercover drug sting, and during it gunfire broke out and a guy shot what he thought was a drug dealer for whatever reason I can't remember, but the prosection was trying to charge him with killing a cop, but he ended up getting found not guilty, or had it thrown out because he had no reasonable expectation that the guy was a cop or something like that. I'll try and find the case.

So in the bar, if Zimmerman thinks he is hitting a bouncer or someone else in the bar trying to hold him back or restrain him, its not that outlandish to say, well I didn't know the guy was a cop, so I shouldnt be charged with assaulting an officer, unless the guy had identified himself as a cop before hand

4/11/2012 11:30:45 PM

Quote :

"WHITE GATED COMMUNITY"

4/11/2012 11:31:02 PM