The Zimmerman Trial

[angelatc]

Anybody watching it? No, me either. Instapundit just opened my eyes about why the media has been so quiet on the daily coverage:

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/171502/


UPDATE: Reader Bill Lux writes: “If their goal is prepping the battlefield then they might get their wish. The mainstream coverage of the trial is so abysmal that I don’t think casual observers realize what a farce this is and how weak the State’s case is (Andrew Branca’s tweeting has been indispensable). If there’s an acquittal, many people will be outraged because they’re so ill-informed.” That’s not by accident.

There's only one more paragraph, but you should definitely click over and read it, too. It's dead on.

[ClydeCoulter]

Anybody watching it? No, me either. Instapundit just opened my eyes about why the media has been so quiet on the daily coverage:

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/171502/



There's only one more paragraph, but you should definitely click over and read it, too. It's dead on.

Yep, and the "tweeking" of the videos that were done assisted in this "cause".

[V3n]

I expect it will end in riots.

[sluggo]

Star witness is an imbecile.

[Nobexliberty]

If non-guilty we will have riots claiming the justice system is racist and if guilty the will be protest about how there was not enough evidence to prove Zimmerman guilty. The only reason why this is a high profile case is because it is a hate crime, is murder that is not a "hate crime" also bad?

[Dr.3D]

If non-guilty we will have riots claiming the justice system is racist and if guilty the will be protest about how there was not enough evidence to prove Zimmerman guilty. The only reason why this is a high profile case is because it is a hate crime, is murder that is not a "hate crime" also bad?
All murder is a hate crime.

[CaptUSA]

Star witness is ...an imbecile.
...a typical American teenager.
...a future welfare case.
...a likely guest on The Maury Show.
...a drain on society.
...a voter.

Ok, now I'm ascared.

[helmuth_hubener]

All murder is a hate crime.

Nah, some murder is just murder.

[Dr.3D]

Nah, some murder is just murder.
So is it worse to hate somebody while you are murdering them?

[Nobexliberty]

All murder is a hate crime. Big brother does not agree.

[Red Green]

Nah, some murder is just murder.

Yeah, it's kinda like cooking: sometimes it's 'good', sometimes its 'bad', but if it's a Paula Deen recipe, now that's straight-up hate cooking right there.

[angelatc]

If non-guilty we will have riots claiming the justice system is racist and if guilty the will be protest about how there was not enough evidence to prove Zimmerman guilty. The only reason why this is a high profile case is because it is a hate crime, is murder that is not a "hate crime" also bad?

I don't think there will be much protesting if Zimmerman is found guilty. Appeals, yes. Protests, no.

If you read the link, you'd see a different theory about why this is a high profile case.

[jmdrake]

I knew Zimmerman / Martin would eventually be dredged back up here. It was a matter of time. So I'm going to say the most un-PC think possible from either "side" of the Zimmerman / Martin divide. If Obama and "big sis" get their way, there will be a lot more Zimmermans, only they will be liberals. Hell, Zimmerman himself might be liberal or might have been before all this. Remember Obama talking about a "civilian national security force?" One of the things that prosecutors have been trying to get brought into this trial is all of Zimmerman's false alarms. Someone in his neighborhood that didn't look like him and he didn't recognize? He would "see something, say something." Every unfamiliar face was a potential criminal suspect. Well....isn't that the world we are headed to? And sure, right now they're using Zimmerman as a "disarm the public" scapegoat. But Obama said he wanted his civilian national security force to be "just as well armed and just as well funded" as the military. I know some want to hold Zimmerman up as the poster child for responsible gun rights. I no more see him like that than I see Trayvon Martin as the poster child of the sweet innocent black kid. I see Zimmerman as a statist that got caught up by the same statist system that he idolized and secretly wanted to be part of.

[Zippyjuan]

You know you might be in trouble when your own lawyer starts off with a knock knock joke. Especially one that implies the jury is stupid.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cykCfynh36s

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I see Zimmerman as a statist that got caught up by the same statist system that he idolized and secretly wanted to be part of.


Probably, yes. This case has nothing to do with the "stand your ground" laws being referenced, but those will be attacked again regardless of verdict.

[Nobexliberty]

I don't think there will be much protesting if Zimmerman is found guilty. Appeals, yes. Protests, no.

If you read the link, you'd see a different theory about why this is a high profile case. You caught me making a bad post, busted:D

[helmuth_hubener]

So is it worse to hate somebody while you are murdering them? I don't know. Maybe? But in any case, it is possible to murder without hatred.

I'll kill a man in a fair fight...
or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight...
or if he bothers me, or if there's a woman...
or if I'm getting paid.

Mostly only when I'm getting paid.


http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-_uGEbtuJnhbmmn/serenity_2005_wondering_about_reavers/

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-_uGEbtuJnhbmmn/serenity_2005_wondering_about_reavers/

The embed is not working for me on this video. Does it work for anyone else? Maybe they need you go to the actual Metacafe site to watch their commercial.

[fisharmor]

claiming the justice system is racist

The thing that bothers me most is that people need a scapegoat to think this.
I mean, COPS has been showing how racist our system of justice is for 20 years now, on prime-time TV.
Why do people need a high-profile case to come to this conclusion?

[Henry Rogue]

The embed is not working for me on this video. Does it work for anyone else? Maybe they need you go to the actual Metacafe site to watch their commercial.My script blocker is blocking it and it doesn't block most videos posted on this forum.

[moostraks]

I knew Zimmerman / Martin would eventually be dredged back up here. It was a matter of time. So I'm going to say the most un-PC think possible from either "side" of the Zimmerman / Martin divide. If Obama and "big sis" get their way, there will be a lot more Zimmerman's, only they will be liberals. Hell, Zimmerman himself might be liberal or might have been before all this. Remember Obama talking about a "civilian national security" force? One of the things that prosecutors have been trying to get brought into this trial is all of Zimmerman's false alarms. Someone in his neighborhood that didn't look like him and he didn't recognize? He would "see something, say something." Every unfamiliar face was a potential criminal suspect. Well....isn't that the world we are headed to? And sure, right now they're using Zimmerman as a "disarm the public" scapegoat. But Obama said he wanted his civilian national security force to be "just as well armed and just as well funded" as the military. I know some want to hold Zimmerman up as the poster child for responsible gun rights. I no more see him like that than I see Trayvon Martin as the poster child of the sweet innocent black kid. I see Zimmerman as a statist that got caught up by the same statist system that he idolized and secretly wanted to be part of.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. So if it's un-pc then we both are, go figure...

[KEEF]

My script blocker is blocking it and it doesn't block most videos posted on this forum.
No video for me either... just for the sake of saying it then... TUBE!!!!

[Antischism]

Interesting case. I don't really have a strong opinion either way at this point, I simply believe both were in the wrong in their own way, with the unfortunate outcome being a dead young man. Hopefully the trial will shed some light and make it a little clearer. I already know people have an agenda to push on both sides, so it's not very surprising to hear terrible arguments in favor of either side.

[rpfocus]

Interesting case. I don't really have a strong opinion either way at this point, I simply believe both were in the wrong in their own way, with the unfortunate outcome being a dead young man. Hopefully the trial will shed some light and make it a little clearer. I already know people have an agenda to push on both sides, so it's not very surprising to hear terrible arguments in favor of either side.

Well stated. I'm not bothering with this trial. It seems to simply further bigoted arguments in both directions. I have better things to do.

[Brian4Liberty]

I haven't watched any of the trial. He'll be found innocent. There will be some riots. The verdict timing will be perfect for riots. Riots are far more likely in the summer heat.

It will be a great distraction from real issues. The Ministry of Truth can turn on a dime, and the fury of the ignorant masses can be redirected at will.

[Zippyjuan]

Curious how a "self defense" theory will work when one person with a gun runs after another unarmed person who was simply walking down the street even after the people at 911 told him not to go after the person. Person with the gun was the one who felt "threatened"? And that fear was somehow eased by running after the other guy rather than staying away from them while the cops were on their way?

[kcchiefs6465]

He'll be found guilty of the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter, sentenced to a suspended sentence, given 10 years supervised probation.

Blacks will be pissed at the injustice, probably rightfully so.

I feel bad for Zimmerman insofar as he has hired a real special kind of idiot to represent him.

[devil21]

It's already turning into a circus.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=19504826


In a painfully embarrassing moment, Jeantel was forced to admit that she did not write a letter that was sent to Martin's mother describing what she allegedly heard on a phone call with Martin moments before he was shot. It came when West asked her to read the letter aloud in court.

"Are you able to read that at all?" West asked.

Jeantel, head bowed, eyes averted whispered into the court microphone, "Some but not all. I don't read cursive."

It sent a hush through the packed courtroom.

She was unable to read any of the letter save for her name, date and the words "thank you."

Jeantel said that she dictated the letter to someone who wrote it for her. West then proceeded to grill Jeantel over why she wasn't specific with Martin's mother about some of the things she heard over the phone, suggesting that her version of what she heard on the phone that night was not complete.

The testimony was an attempt to raise questions about veracity of Jeantel's testimony, who is a key prosecution witness in the racially charged case.

[rpfocus]

It's already turning into a circus.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=19504826

Proof that allowing remedials to advance grades doesn't help anyone.

[YesI'mALiberal]

I feel bad for Zimmerman insofar as he has hired a real special kind of idiot to represent him.

Richard Gilbert?

[liveandletlive]

You can't fix stupid. Our public school education system on display with that witness. A 19 year old who is "functionally illiterate" with the millions we spend on education.

I feel for Trayvons father...who probably wanted to strangle that girls neck

[kcchiefs6465]

Richard Gilbert?
Whoever opened up with a knock knock joke isn't fit to represent anyone for a traffic ticket let alone a murder charge. I haven't been following the case much but I believe Zimmerman is the one who hired him. He has to be kicking himself for that one. To have your representation make jokes at a murder trial... well I can't imagine it's ever been done. Certainly after how it went over, it won't be happening again any time soon.

[dannno]

Curious how a "self defense" theory will work when one person with a gun runs after another unarmed person who was simply walking down the street even after the people at 911 told him not to go after the person. Person with the gun was the one who felt "threatened"? And that fear was somehow eased by running after the other guy rather than staying away from them while the cops were on their way?

Where is the proof that this is what happened?

That isn't how our legal system works, you can't just make up a story and say that somebody is guilty.

First of all, just because 911 told Zimmerman not to follow skittleboy doesn't mean he was not in his right to follow skittleboy. Skittleboy could have very easily felt threatened by the presence of Zimmerman and attacked Zimmerman!! In fact, witnesses said that skittleboy was on TOP of Zimmerman, punching him in the head when Zimmerman pulled out his gun and shot him.

All of that evidence leads to a good argument for self defense. Now, it's very possible that Zimmerman attacked skittleboy, but there really isn't any evidence of that, is there? You actually have to PROVE that Zimmerman attacked skittleboy in this country in order to find him guilty, and I haven't seen any evidence of that.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

First of all, just because 911 told Zimmerman not to follow skittleboy doesn't mean he was not in his right to follow skittleboy. Skittleboy could have very easily felt threatened by the presence of Zimmerman and attacked Zimmerman!! In fact, witnesses said that skittleboy was on TOP of Zimmerman, punching him in the head when Zimmerman pulled out his gun and shot him.

All of that evidence leads to self defense. Now, it's very possible that Zimmerman attacked skittleboy, but there really isn't any evidence of that, is there?


Well, he had no reason or authority to follow him in the first place. The fact that he was told not to... well, that was good advice he didn't take, even though it came from a 911 dispatcher.

Given everything he knows now, I bet Zimmerman would have been thrilled to take that advice.

If someone is following me around... what am I supposed to think about that? 95% of the time, I wouldn't care. The other 5%, ???

[RickyJ]

You know you might be in trouble when your own lawyer starts off with a knock knock joke. Especially one that implies the jury is stupid.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cykCfynh36s


They are stupid. That was a good joke. They didn't laugh or smile because they felt bad about lying to get on the jury.

[brandon]

I've had a bad fever all week, which means I've stayed home from work bed ridden. I've watched the entirety of day 2 and day 3 of the trial, and part of todays.

I concur with the OP. I'm absolutely flabergasted at the media coverage of this. The state's case is a complete clusterfuck. They don't have a single credible witness. The star witness is an illiterate, rude, thug girl who has previously lied under oath and has already changed her testimony several times. If there were an odds market for this case, I'd bet "not guilty" would currently be running about 99 to 1. Yet when I turn on the TV I hear the exact opposite. It makes no sense.

[Dr.3D]

What is to say, Zimmerman didn't turn to go back to his vehicle only to be attacked by Trayvon for following him?

We have not heard enough of the evidence or even the story to even guess about what happened.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I've had a bad fever all week, which means I've stayed home from work bed ridden. I've watched the entirety of day 2 and day 3 of the trial, and part of todays.

I concur with the OP. I'm absolutely flabergasted at the media coverage of this. The state's case is a complete clusterfuck. They don't have a single credible witness. The star witness is an illiterate, rude, thug girl who has previously lied under oath and has already changed her testimony several times. If there were an odds market for this case, I'd bet "not guilty" would currently be running about 99 to 1. Yet when I turn on the TV I hear the exact opposite. It makes no sense.


And you can bet that will cause an uproar regarding "stand your ground" laws. That's what this is about, even though it doesn't fit the facts of the case.

[Dr.3D]

I've had a bad fever all week, which means I've stayed home from work bed ridden. I've watched the entirety of day 2 and day 3 of the trial, and part of todays.

I concur with the OP. I'm absolutely flabergasted at the media coverage of this. The state's case is a complete clusterfuck. They don't have a single credible witness. The star witness is an illiterate, rude, thug girl who has previously lied under oath and has already changed her testimony several times. If there were an odds market for this case, I'd bet "not guilty" would currently be running about 99 to 1. Yet when I turn on the TV I hear the exact opposite. It makes no sense.
The media has already found Zimmerman guilty. They spread the story months ago.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

What is to say, Zimmerman didn't turn to go back to his vehicle only to be attacked by Trayvon for following him?

We have not heard enough of the evidence or even the story to even guess about what happened.



Ummm... don't go looking for a fight unless you want one?

[dannno]

Well, he had no reason or authority to follow him in the first place. The fact that he was told not to... well, that was good advice he didn't take, even though it came from a 911 dispatcher.

Authority?? Free fucking country. You have no argument here, except that in this case I will admit it was good advice he could have followed, but there is no reason he had to follow it. What if skittleboy turned out to be the person robbing the neighborhood and Zimmerman instead caught him and held him until police arrived? A 911 dispatcher would recommend against this, but it is perfectly legal. But how would Zimmerman or 911 dispatcher know this before it happened? The 911 dispatcher in this case was lucky and happened to give the correct advise.




Given everything he knows now, I bet Zimmerman would have been thrilled to take that advice.

If someone is following me around... what am I supposed to think about that? 95% of the time, I wouldn't care. The other 5%, ???

If somebody was following me around I would either head straight home or confront them by casually saying 'hi' and starting up a conversation. I'm pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted like a total dick, but after skittleboy explained he was visiting his aunt and gave him the address of where she lived he would have backed off.. but instead, according to Zimmerman, he just straight up attacked him.

Now, again, I wasn't there, I have no idea what actually transpired, but in order to convict Zimmerman of murder, you have to prove that he wasn't attacked by skittleboy and that is going to be very difficult now that our star witness for skittleboy, who was not only his gf but was on a cell phone and didn't actually see what happened anyway.. she can barely read and that testimony is sounding really weak.

[dannno]

Ummm... don't go looking for a fight unless you want one?

Who was looking for a fight? I thought Zimmerman was looking for a burglar.

You are putting actions into Zimmerman's arms that weren't necessarily there.

[Dr.3D]

Ummm... don't go looking for a fight unless you want one?
That could be said for the one who attacked and was defended against as well.

[kcchiefs6465]

Where is the proof that this is what happened?

That isn't how our legal system works, you can't just make up a story and say that somebody is guilty.

First of all, just because 911 told Zimmerman not to follow skittleboy doesn't mean he was not in his right to follow skittleboy. Skittleboy could have very easily felt threatened by the presence of Zimmerman and attacked Zimmerman!! In fact, witnesses said that skittleboy was on TOP of Zimmerman, punching him in the head when Zimmerman pulled out his gun and shot him.

All of that evidence leads to a good argument for self defense. Now, it's very possible that Zimmerman attacked skittleboy, but there really isn't any evidence of that, is there? You actually have to PROVE that Zimmerman attacked skittleboy in this country in order to find him guilty, and I haven't seen any evidence of that.
Skittleboy?

Here's the facts: Wannabe-Rent-a-pig stares down Trayvon Martin. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig chases after a man he had no business in accosting. Trayvon Martin rightfully defended himself from a man who was chasing him down. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig can't fight, so wannabe-Rent-a-pig gets knocked to the ground. Trayvon Martin beat wannabe-Rent-a-pig who probably did fear for his life. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig shot Trayvon Martin.

The fact remains the same that had wannabe-Rent-a-pig not been a wannabe-Rent-a-pig and chased down a teenager minding his own business, Trayvon Martin would still be alive.

Wannabe-Rent-a-pig is largely to blame and should be held accountable for his actions. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig should do some time. Now what wannabe-Rent-a-pig should be convicted on I can't say. Second degree murder seems somewhat appropriate. After all, it was wannabe-Rent-a-pig's actions that led to the confrontation, Wannabe-Rent-a-pig wouldn't have been beat to death, and you know what? He probably deserved being fended off. Someone chases me up the road it is only going to be so far until I turn around to defend myself.

Here's what the dispatcher should have said, or wannabe-Rent-a-pig's parents should have taught him at some point in his life. "Mind your own goddamn business you nosy fuck." Might have him from some years and the teenager would still be alive.

Whatever happens... meh. He killed the kid. You can't argue self-defense when you accost someone, instigate a fight, and end up getting your ass rightfully whooped. It's not the end of the world to have a few lumps or even the lacerations that he had. He should have taken it as a lesson and moved on. But he was a wannabe-Rent-a-pig, he was ascared. You don't want to scare wannabe-Rent-a-pig, rent-a-pigs, or pigs, that's how people get mistakenly shot, or just shot in general.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Who was looking for a fight? I thought Zimmerman was looking for a burglar.

You are putting actions into Zimmerman's arms that weren't necessarily there.


I'll accept that. Why is Zimmerman looking for burglars?

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I'll accept that. Why is Zimmerman looking for burglars?


Just to be clear... there is one person in my home looking for burglars. Wanna guess how to find me?

[kcchiefs6465]

They are stupid. That was a good joke. They didn't laugh or smile because they felt bad about lying to get on the jury.
You don't joke at a murder trial. That is such a fundamentally understood concept, I doubt they spend more than 10 seconds or so covering the subject at Law School. :rolleyes:

If that was my lawyer, I'd be rightfully pissed. If I ended up getting convicted I'd be rightfully pissed. Now he hired him so I don't know how far it would be for grounds for an appeal but seriously, the joke wasn't even funny, (when the opening to the joke is four times longer than the joke, let's just say you aren't a comedian) and even if it were your client is facing 20 some years. Tf are you telling jokes for in a situation as grave as that?

[kcchiefs6465]

If somebody was following me around I would either head straight home or confront them by casually saying 'hi' and starting up a conversation. I'm pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted like a total dick, but after skittleboy explained he was visiting his aunt and gave him the address of where she lived he would have backed off.. but instead, according to Zimmerman, he just straight up attacked him.

Wow.

Who the fuck is wannabe-rent-a-pig that he ought to be answered to?

[dannno]

I'll accept that. Why is Zimmerman looking for burglars?

Because there had been a lot of robberies in the neighborhood recently.

[ClydeCoulter]

I'm of the opinion that the "Joke" may work. He was putting the jury on notice. It really wasn't a joke, it was a conscience awakener.

[RickyJ]

You don't joke at a murder trial. That is such a fundamentally understood concept, I doubt they spend more than 10 seconds or so covering the subject at Law School. :rolleyes:

If that was my lawyer, I'd be rightfully pissed. If I ended up getting convicted I'd be rightfully pissed. Now he hired him so I don't know how far it would be for grounds for an appeal but seriously, the joke wasn't even funny, (when the opening to the joke is four times longer than the joke, let's just say you aren't a comedian) and even if it were your client is facing 20 some years. Tf are you telling jokes for in a situation as grave as that?

I heard plenty of people laughing in the court room, apparently none of them were jurors though. He was getting a reading on the jury he was dealing with here. It is better to know that at the start of the trial than midway through or near the end. Now he knows the right path to take for his defense of Zimmerman. He knows many on this jury probably were not telling the truth when they said they never heard of George Zimmerman before. That is very important info for a defense attorney to know about.

[RickyJ]

I'm of the opinion that the "Joke" may work. He was putting the jury on notice. It really wasn't a joke, it was a conscience awakener.

Right, he was making many of them feel bad for lying to get on the jury. Who the heck hadn't heard of George Zimmerman in Florida last year? Cave dwellers?

[kcchiefs6465]

I'm of the opinion that the "Joke" may work. He was putting the jury on notice. It really wasn't a joke, it was a conscience awakener.
Well, you never know. Maybe it did awaken the jury to the fact that this has been a media spectacle since day one.

I wouldn't be betting my freedom on it, that's for sure though. Thinking about it, I'm sure he probably talked it over with Zimmerman. If my freedom was in limbo for a day, though, I'd be upset at my representation. If I was facing the sort of time he is it would be hard not to get upset. It isn't My Cousin Vinny. There are serious consequences the man faces. I'd prefer my lawyer understand the seriousness of those consequences.

Everyone deserves adequate representation. I find it kind of kangarooish.

[dannno]

Skittleboy?

Here's the facts: Wannabe-Rent-a-pig stares down Trayvon Martin. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig chases after a man he had no business in accosting. Trayvon Martin rightfully defended himself from a man who was chasing him down. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig can't fight, so wannabe-Rent-a-pig gets knocked to the ground. Trayvon Martin beat wannabe-Rent-a-pig who probably did fear for his life. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig shot Trayvon Martin.

The fact remains the same that had wannabe-Rent-a-pig not been a wannabe-Rent-a-pig and chased down a teenager minding his own business, Trayvon Martin would still be alive.

Wannabe-Rent-a-pig is largely to blame and should be held accountable for his actions. Wannabe-Rent-a-pig should do some time. Now what wannabe-Rent-a-pig should be convicted on I can't say. Second degree murder seems somewhat appropriate. After all, it was wannabe-Rent-a-pig's actions that led to the confrontation, Wannabe-Rent-a-pig wouldn't have been beat to death, and you know what? He probably deserved being fended off. Someone chases me up the road it is only going to be so far until I turn around to defend myself.

Here's what the dispatcher should have said, or wannabe-Rent-a-pig's parents should have taught him at some point in his life. "Mind your own goddamn business you nosy fuck." Might have him from some years and the teenager would still be alive.

Whatever happens... meh. He killed the kid. You can't argue self-defense when you accost someone, instigate a fight, and end up getting your ass rightfully whooped. It's not the end of the world to have a few lumps or even the lacerations that he had. He should have taken it as a lesson and moved on. But he was a wannabe-Rent-a-pig, he was ascared. You don't want to scare wannabe-Rent-a-pig, rent-a-pigs, or pigs, that's how people get mistakenly shot, or just shot in general.

There are a lot of things in here that aren't facts. We don't know if Zimmerman chased him, he could have merely followed him, which he has every right to do, and then as Dr. 3D said he may have even turned around to head back and skittleboy just comes up behind him and attacks him. In that case, Zimmerman didn't cause anything. Then there is the grey area of in between where some sort of verbal confrontation occurred, and then one of them attacked the other. We have no idea what went down, but you have to PROVE that Zimmerman wasn't attacked, otherwise there is reasonable doubt because he could have been attacked based on the evidence.


Wow.

Who the fuck is wannabe-rent-a-pig that he ought to be answered to?

That's where option 1 comes in - go straight home. What if skittleboy didn't go straight home? What if he turned around and went after Zimmerman who was following him?

I'm just saying what I would do personally, if I were in a strange neighborhood that is gated and some guy was concerned that I was there I might start a conversation like a normal human being, maybe tell them who I'm staying with. If it's not a gated community then I'd feel more inclined to ignore the person, but if it's a gated community then they probably know the person I'm staying with and once they know then I know I will be able to walk around there without freaking out people who get worried about that crap and I can give the person I'm staying with's neighbor some peace of mind.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Authority?? Free fucking country. You have no argument here, except that in this case I will admit it was good advice he could have followed, but there is no reason he had to follow it. What if skittleboy turned out to be the person robbing the neighborhood and Zimmerman instead caught him and held him until police arrived? A 911 dispatcher would recommend against this, but it is perfectly legal. But how would Zimmerman or 911 dispatcher know this before it happened? The 911 dispatcher in this case was lucky and happened to give the correct advise.


That's not realistic. You ever see people running around on the net who call themselves "sheepdogs"? They're not cops, but still think they need to run around protecting people who didn't ask for it?

Either of those clowns can push up on my door and see how it works out.

[moostraks]

Authority?? Free fucking country. You have no argument here, except that in this case I will admit it was good advice he could have followed, but there is no reason he had to follow it. What if skittleboy turned out to be the person robbing the neighborhood and Zimmerman instead caught him and held him until police arrived? A 911 dispatcher would recommend against this, but it is perfectly legal. But how would Zimmerman or 911 dispatcher know this before it happened? The 911 dispatcher in this case was lucky and happened to give the correct advise.




If somebody was following me around I would either head straight home or confront them by casually saying 'hi' and starting up a conversation. I'm pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted like a total dick, but after skittleboy explained he was visiting his aunt and gave him the address of where she lived he would have backed off.. but instead, according to Zimmerman, he just straight up attacked him.

Now, again, I wasn't there, I have no idea what actually transpired, but in order to convict Zimmerman of murder, you have to prove that he wasn't attacked by skittleboy and that is going to be very difficult now that our star witness for skittleboy, who was not only his gf but was on a cell phone and didn't actually see what happened anyway.. she can barely read and that testimony is sounding really weak.

And the same goes both ways as far as free country. Upon who's authority is Zimmerman entitled to chase down someone and demand their itinerary? I don't think burglaries occurring entitle homeowners to chase down pedestrians and demand their name,address, and family relationships as they are walking through the neighborhood. I am not a buttinski neighbor though and I absolutely detest those that take it upon themselves to interfere in the lives of others. To blame the dead guy for having an illiterate girlfriend by saying it somehow helps the defenses case, well that's sad.

[kcchiefs6465]

I heard plenty of people laughing in the court room, apparently none of them were jurors though. He was getting a reading on the jury he was dealing with here. It is better to know that at the start of the trial than midway through or near the end. Now he knows the right path to take for his defense of Zimmerman. He knows many on this jury probably were not telling the truth when they said they never heard of George Zimmerman before. That is very important info for a defense attorney to know about.
I doubt they questioned whether or not the people had heard of Zimmerman during jury selection. They surely questioned how much they had heard though.

At best, 3 of the 6 could have told the prosecutor they had not heard anything about the trial, the prosecutor could read them as having their mind made up and select them. Or the defense could have found three people who said the same thing, he might read them as not having their mind made up and select them. It isn't really a yes or no kind of question but a question of to what extent. (at least, if the people were at all competent, which is hard to argue for)

There are other things that would play roles in their decision as well. The defense should generally have an idea of who the jurors are.

The joke might work in his favor, I doubt it. Unless Zimmerman was aware and agreed to it I find it offensive that that would be the standard of his representation. Even if he was the one who hired the man.

[ClydeCoulter]

I doubt they questioned whether or not the people had heard of Zimmerman during jury selection. They surely questioned how much they had heard though.

At best, 3 of the 6 could have told the prosecutor they had not heard anything about the trial, the prosecutor could read them as having their mind made up and select them. Or the defense could have found three people who said the same thing, he might read them as not having their mind made up and select them. It isn't really a yes or no kind of question but a question of to what extent. (at least, if the people were at all competent, which is hard to argue for)

There are other things that would play roles in their decision as well. The defense should generally have an idea of who the jurors are.

The joke might work in his favor, I doubt it. Unless Zimmerman was aware and agreed to it I find it offensive that that would be the standard of his representation. Even if he was the one who hired the man.

I'm trying to think of what would work when you have a jury that has seen videos that were scrubbed to make it look like Zimmerman had no injuries, the threat of being looked at as racist, and all of the other media playout. It's a rough way to start a trial. I think the joke was a shock...look at all the shock even from non-jurists.

[kcchiefs6465]

That's where option 1 comes in - go straight home. What if skittleboy didn't go straight home? What if he turned around and went after Zimmerman who was following him?

Then I would say Wannabe-Rent-a-pig got what was coming his way. You remember being a kid and if you asked someone's business they would say MYOB? I guess no one ever told Wannabe-Rent-a-pig that. Or being a Wannabe-Rent-a-pig was ingrained in his blood, as is the case with many a nosy neighbor.

[devil21]

I've had a bad fever all week, which means I've stayed home from work bed ridden. I've watched the entirety of day 2 and day 3 of the trial, and part of todays.

I concur with the OP. I'm absolutely flabergasted at the media coverage of this. The state's case is a complete clusterfuck. They don't have a single credible witness. The star witness is an illiterate, rude, thug girl who has previously lied under oath and has already changed her testimony several times. If there were an odds market for this case, I'd bet "not guilty" would currently be running about 99 to 1. Yet when I turn on the TV I hear the exact opposite. It makes no sense.

Where are you watching the trial?

[Dr.3D]

Then I would say Wannabe-Rent-a-pig got what was coming his way.

And the one who drew first blood got what he deserved too.

[brandon]

Where are you watching the trial?

https://www.youtube.com/user/croakerqueen123?feature=watch

This youtube account uploads all the raw video of the trials.

[devil21]

https://www.youtube.com/user/croakerqueen123?feature=watch

This youtube account uploads all the raw video of the trials.

Thanks. I guess the days of Court TV type broadcasts are over.

[enhanced_deficit]

Not sure why media owners/Obama pupms are pushing this hard in news cycle? It is a tiny story in the current affairs.

[Dr.3D]

Not sure why media owners/Obama pupms are pushing this hard in news cycle? It is a tiny story in the current affairs.

Perhaps it's a distraction from his violating his oath of office.

[enhanced_deficit]

What the Dr said.

This is a total distraction ploy by media owners.

[kcchiefs6465]

And the one who drew first blood got what he deserved too.
That sounds like something my generation would say. Instead of a fist fight (in this case a rightfully deserved fight Zimmerman instigated) people are simply shooting each other.

Fact of the matter remains, had Zimmerman's parents (a lot of blame on our media as a whole) instilled the value of staying out of people's business when you don't belong, Martin would be alive and Zimmerman not facing trial. As simple as that.

I suppose that's where I'm different from the average Merican. I honestly do not care what my neighbors are doing. I don't pay attention to a person simply because they are walking down the road. I could care less about fashion and gossip and the rest of that petty shit. I was raised different. For one, keep family business in the family and two, mind your own business. If Trayvon Martin was not violating Zimmerman, Zimmerman had no right whatsoever to follow him, chase him, any. The retaliation he got was a predictable reaction to his actions. Would you chase someone down the road and not expect them to confront you? To possibly "attack" you? (rightfully so, I'd add) Had the same scenario happened and Trayvon Martin took the gun, I would have no problem with the man being held at bay with his own weapon. I certainly wouldn't let him have it. If I determined everything had subsided I would take his magazine clear the chamber and give the gun back. I'd go on my way.

If Zimmerman tried to attack after the gun was hypothetically taken from him, and Martin shot him, THAT would be standing your ground. Martin didn't ask to be followed and harassed down the road. Zimmerman took it upon himself because he is indeed, a nosy, wannabe pig. You have to understand though, only cops can do what he did and not get charged. When you are a simple serf, provoke a confrontation and the result is someone dying, you're going to jail.

The media coverage is shameful, bringing up STYG laws as a defense is ridiculous. What he should be convicted of I do not know. The fact remains, had he gotten in his car and left, he would still be free.

I feel the same way about "Guardian Angels" and the rest who think they are the police or think they have the authority to demand an answer to a question. Martin should have told him rightfully so, "Get the fuck away me. It's none of your goddamn business what I'm doing here." I imagine he did.

[RonPaulMall]

Not sure why media owners/Obama pupms are pushing this hard in news cycle? It is a tiny story in the current affairs.

They want riots. Note the complete disconnect between the way the talking heads have been portraying the trial and the way the trial is actually playing out. I don't think I've ever seen a more laughable presentation of a criminal case than the one the prosecution has laid out thus far. But the media is playing it like they are winning. Why? Because they know blacks aren't watching the trial itself and the media want them to think it is a slam dunk so when the inevitable acquittal comes, they will go on a rampage. The trial itself is a distraction, sure, but it will pale compared to the race riots that ensue.

[kcchiefs6465]

Not sure why media owners/Obama pupms are pushing this hard in news cycle? It is a tiny story in the current affairs.
To sow dissent and make people feel unrepresented. It's a lot easier to rule with people divided.

If they find Zimmerman not guilty people will probably riot. Nothing like Rodney King but I wouldn't doubt some windows get broken and some militarized police officers cracking skulls in badgeless riot gear.

Democracy works best when everyone is at eachother's throats. Blacks, whites, Hispanics - everyone - working together things would change. Keep the groups small and subdivided.

[Dr.3D]

That sounds like something my generation would say. Instead of a fist fight (in this case a rightfully deserved fight Zimmerman instigated) people are simply shooting each other.

Fact of the matter remains, had Zimmerman's parents (a lot of blame on our media as a whole) instilled the value of staying out of people's business when you don't belong. Martin would be alive and Zimmerman not facing trial. As simple as that.

I suppose that's where I different from the average Merican. I honestly do not care what my neighbors are doing. I don't pay attention to a person simply because they are walking down the road. I could care less about fashion and gossip and the rest of that petty shit. I was raised different. To one, keep family business in the family and two, mind your own business. If Trayvon Martin was not violating Zimmerman, Zimmerman had no right whatsoever to follow him, chase him, any. The retaliation he got was a predictable reaction to his actions. Would you chase someone down the road and not expect them to confront you? To possibly "attack" you? (rightfully so, I'd add) Had the same scenario happened and Trayvon Martin took the gun, I would have no problem with the man being held at bay with his own weapon. I certainly wouldn't let him have it. If I determined everything had subsided I would take his magazine clear the chamber and give the gun back. I'd go on my way.

If Zimmerman tried to attack after the gun was hypothetically taken from him, and Martin shot him, THAT would be standing your ground. Martin didn't ask to be followed and harassed down the road. Zimmerman took it upon himself because he is indeed, a nosy, wannabe pig. You have to understand though, only cops can do what he did and not get charged. When you are a simple serf, provoke a confrontation and the result is someone dying, you're going to jail.

The media coverage is shameful, bringing up STYG laws as a defense is ridiculous. What he should be convicted of I do not know. The fact remains, had he gotten in his car and left, he would still be free.

I feel the same way about "Guardian Angels" and the rest who think they are the police or think they have the authority to demand an answer to a question. Martin should have told him rightfully so, "Get the fuck away me. It's none of your goddamn business what I'm doing here." I imagine he did.
If somebody had me pinned to the ground and said they were going to kill me and then started punching my face in, I would draw my pistol and shoot that person too.

[RonPaulMall]

Yeah, the reason SYG doesn't apply in this case is because Zimmerman was on his back on the ground. He had no option to retreat, so whether Florida is a SYG jurisdiction or not is irrelevant. The shooting would be justified even in a pure "duty to retreat" state. We don't even have to get in to SYG.

[RickyJ]

To sow dissent and make people feel unrepresented. It's a lot easier to rule with people divided.

If they find Zimmerman not guilty people will probably riot. Nothing like Rodney King but I wouldn't doubt some windows get broken and some militarized police officers cracking skulls in badgeless riot gear.

Democracy works best when everyone is at eachother's throats. Blacks, whites, Hispanics - everyone - working together things would change. Keep the groups small and subdivided.

Just as long as people leave the Jews alone, it is A-OK with this government if everyone else is fighting each other.

[Schifference]

I think is is a sad state when one ethnicity can use vocabulary that is considered ordinary language and when another ethnicity utilizes the same vocabulary they are deemed as racist.

[Zippyjuan]

Yeah, the reason SYG doesn't apply in this case is because Zimmerman was on his back on the ground. He had no option to retreat, so whether Florida is a SYG jurisdiction or not is irrelevant. The shooting would be justified even in a pure "duty to retreat" state. We don't even have to get in to SYG.
When he called the cops, the officer could hear him (Zimmerman) breathing heavily. They asked are you following Martin. He said yes. They said don't- they were on their way. The conflict where Martin died was a quite a ways from there. Is running after somebody "standing your ground"? Hardly. Was he afraid of Martin? Zimmerman had a gun. Martin had skittles. Martin had made no threats to Zimmerman. He had no reason to run after the boy. That too is not standing your ground when under threat. If he had stood his ground when he made his calls to 911, the confrontation would never have happened and nobody shot.

Partial transcript: http://bizsecurity.about.com/od/creatingpolicies/a/A-Transcript-Of-The-George-Zimmerman-Police-Call.htm


Dispatcher

Yeah we've got someone on the way, just let me know if this guy does anything else.

Zimmerman

Okay. These (expletive) they always get away. Yep. When you come to the clubhouse you come straight in and make a left. Actually you would go past the clubhouse.

Dispatcher

So it's on the lefthand side from the clubhouse?

Zimmerman

No you go in straight through the entrance and then you make a left, uh, you go straight in, don't turn, and make a left. (expletive) he's running.

Dispatcher

He's running? Which way is he running?
Ambient sounds are heard which may be Zimmerman unbuckling his seat belt and his vehicle's "open door" chime sounding. The change in his voice and the sound of wind against his cell phone mic indicate that he has left his vehicle and is now walking. The dispatcher seems to pick up on these changes and sounds concerned when he later asks Zimmerman if he is following Martin.
Zimmerman

Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood.

Dispatcher

Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?

Zimmerman

The back entrance…(expletive)(unclear)

This section of the recording has been the subject of much speculation. Some suggest that Zimmerman has just made a racial slur, but the audio is not clear.

Dispatcher

Are you following him?

Zimmerman

Yeah.

Dispatcher

Ok, we don't need you to do that.

Zimmerman

Ok.

[Antischism]

I've been watching the trial from the start for a couple of hours now, and all I can really say so far is that the defense attorney is really sloppy and not very convincing. The prosecution looks much sharper and sure thus far.

From what I'm hearing, Trayvon's friend made a fool of herself, so I'm anticipating that part of the trial. I don't know how much of it I'll be watching, but I've got a bad cold that's keeping me down so this is something I can watch while lying down for some time.

[talkingpointes]

When he called the cops, the officer could hear him (Zimmerman) breathing heavily. They asked are you following Martin. He said yes. They said don't- they were on their way. The conflict where Martin died was a quite a ways from there. Is running after somebody "standing your ground"? Hardly. Was he afraid of Martin? Zimmerman had a gun. Martin had skittles. Martin had made no threats to Zimmerman. He had no reason to run after the boy. That too is not standing your ground when under threat. If he had stood his ground when he made his calls to 911, the confrontation would never have happened and nobody shot.

Partial transcript: http://bizsecurity.about.com/od/creatingpolicies/a/A-Transcript-Of-The-George-Zimmerman-Police-Call.htm

Have you watched any of the trial yet ? If not you might want to wait before making any conclusions. Trayvons "friend" is openly bigoted and it's not looking good for the prosecutor. Peter Schiff has a hilarious video talking about some of it. This girl apparently wrote a letter to Trayvon but she couldn't even read it. She must be 20 years old and can't even read.

[talkingpointes]

That sounds like something my generation would say. Instead of a fist fight (in this case a rightfully deserved fight Zimmerman instigated) people are simply shooting each other.

Fact of the matter remains, had Zimmerman's parents (a lot of blame on our media as a whole) instilled the value of staying out of people's business when you don't belong, Martin would be alive and Zimmerman not facing trial. As simple as that.

I suppose that's where I'm different from the average Merican. I honestly do not care what my neighbors are doing. I don't pay attention to a person simply because they are walking down the road. I could care less about fashion and gossip and the rest of that petty shit. I was raised different. For one, keep family business in the family and two, mind your own business. If Trayvon Martin was not violating Zimmerman, Zimmerman had no right whatsoever to follow him, chase him, any. The retaliation he got was a predictable reaction to his actions. Would you chase someone down the road and not expect them to confront you? To possibly "attack" you? (rightfully so, I'd add) Had the same scenario happened and Trayvon Martin took the gun, I would have no problem with the man being held at bay with his own weapon. I certainly wouldn't let him have it. If I determined everything had subsided I would take his magazine clear the chamber and give the gun back. I'd go on my way.

If Zimmerman tried to attack after the gun was hypothetically taken from him, and Martin shot him, THAT would be standing your ground. Martin didn't ask to be followed and harassed down the road. Zimmerman took it upon himself because he is indeed, a nosy, wannabe pig. You have to understand though, only cops can do what he did and not get charged. When you are a simple serf, provoke a confrontation and the result is someone dying, you're going to jail.

The media coverage is shameful, bringing up STYG laws as a defense is ridiculous. What he should be convicted of I do not know. The fact remains, had he gotten in his car and left, he would still be free.

I feel the same way about "Guardian Angels" and the rest who think they are the police or think they have the authority to demand an answer to a question. Martin should have told him rightfully so, "Get the fuck away me. It's none of your goddamn business what I'm doing here." I imagine he did.

After you have someone like Trayvon (a misguided youth) break into your home -- you will be literally eating your words. Trayvon OPENLY bragged on his FB about robbing women.

[Ender]

That sounds like something my generation would say. Instead of a fist fight (in this case a rightfully deserved fight Zimmerman instigated) people are simply shooting each other.

Fact of the matter remains, had Zimmerman's parents (a lot of blame on our media as a whole) instilled the value of staying out of people's business when you don't belong, Martin would be alive and Zimmerman not facing trial. As simple as that.

I suppose that's where I'm different from the average Merican. I honestly do not care what my neighbors are doing. I don't pay attention to a person simply because they are walking down the road. I could care less about fashion and gossip and the rest of that petty shit. I was raised different. For one, keep family business in the family and two, mind your own business. If Trayvon Martin was not violating Zimmerman, Zimmerman had no right whatsoever to follow him, chase him, any. The retaliation he got was a predictable reaction to his actions. Would you chase someone down the road and not expect them to confront you? To possibly "attack" you? (rightfully so, I'd add) Had the same scenario happened and Trayvon Martin took the gun, I would have no problem with the man being held at bay with his own weapon. I certainly wouldn't let him have it. If I determined everything had subsided I would take his magazine clear the chamber and give the gun back. I'd go on my way.

If Zimmerman tried to attack after the gun was hypothetically taken from him, and Martin shot him, THAT would be standing your ground. Martin didn't ask to be followed and harassed down the road. Zimmerman took it upon himself because he is indeed, a nosy, wannabe pig. You have to understand though, only cops can do what he did and not get charged. When you are a simple serf, provoke a confrontation and the result is someone dying, you're going to jail.

The media coverage is shameful, bringing up STYG laws as a defense is ridiculous. What he should be convicted of I do not know. The fact remains, had he gotten in his car and left, he would still be free.

I feel the same way about "Guardian Angels" and the rest who think they are the police or think they have the authority to demand an answer to a question. Martin should have told him rightfully so, "Get the fuck away me. It's none of your goddamn business what I'm doing here." I imagine he did.

I agree 1000%.

I did a lot of studying on the whole Trayvon/Zimmerman incident and everything that I have found leads back to Zimmerman not minding his own business and trying to be the bad ass.

[Ender]

After you have someone like Trayvon (a misguided youth) break into your home -- you will be literally eating your words. Trayvon OPENLY bragged on his FB about robbing women.

You mean the phony FB page that turned out NOT to be Trayvon?

And what you are advocating is Minority Report crap.

[talkingpointes]

You mean the phony FB page that turned out NOT to be Trayvon?

And what you are advocating is Minority Report crap.

Yeah, exactly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/us/zimmermans-lawyers-release-text-messages-of-trayvon-martin.html?_r=0

Was he bringing that gun around in his suburban neighborhood to protect himself. Are you that dense?

[Ender]

Yeah, exactly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/us/zimmermans-lawyers-release-text-messages-of-trayvon-martin.html?_r=0

Oh the NY Times! The paper no believes unless it's convenient.

And gangsta rap is still rap- nothing more. It has nothing to do with Zimmerman causing the whole fiasco.

[talkingpointes]

Oh the NY Times! The paper no believes unless it's convenient.

And gangsta rap is still rap- nothing more. It has nothing to do with Zimmerman causing the whole fiasco.

So you think that's all fake -- eventhough it's from his OWN phone?

For the record I do have a bias I have been robbed and beaten half to death by 7 black men. Yeah it's hard to not be angry but they did it because I was a "racist". I was best friends with the brother of the guy that lead in the guys that did it. Fact is they were the racist and the criminals, it's easier to call someone else the names and make them the bad guy.

I generally can't stand people that talk like he does -- sorry. It takes me back to being in my room on my knees while one man held a gun to my head and another beat the shit out of me and 5 others kept asking me for a safe.

The second time they raped my gf at the time.(I jumped out my window and ran into a neighbors house) Sorry it was 1 mexican and 4 black guys that I had never met that kicked down my door at 3am in the morning.

For the record I was growing mushrooms. But that didn't make me a criminal, and most certainly not a racist.

If you want me too be really honest. I never spoke to my best friend again and never told him why, and since then it's still hard for me to be around black men. I'm sorry. I didn't want this.

(4 of the first 7 are dead, he's brother was killed with the other 3 two weeks later when they attempted to rob a mexican gangs gun house - I honestly didn't feel bad for him and that was probably the last words we ever shared- I do blame him. I had never, ever met his brother)

[Zippyjuan]

The key is who initiated the confrontation. By Zimmerman's own words, Treyvon was seen walking down the street, doing nothing besides "looking odd". Treyvon walked away from Zimmerman and Zimmerman went after him- even after being told not to. If he want to plead "Stand Your Ground" it does not look good that he went after the person who had done nothing to him.


Zimmerman

Hey we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy, uh, it's Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher

OK, and this guy is he white, black, or hispanic?

Zimmerman

He looks black.

Dispatcher

Did you see what he was wearing?

Zimmerman

Yeah. A dark hoodie, like a grey hoodie, and either jeans or sweatpants and white tennis shoes. He's here now, he was just staring.

Dispatcher

OK, he's just walking around the area…

Zimmerman

looking at all the houses.

Dispatcher

OK…

Zimmerman

Now he's just staring at me.

[Red Green]

The key is who initiated the confrontation. By Zimmerman's own words, Treyvon was seen walking down the street, doing nothing besides "looking odd". Treyvon walked away from Zimmerman and Zimmerman went after him- even after being told not to. If he want to plead "Stand Your Ground" it does not look good that he went after the person who had done nothing to him.

He can watch and follow Treyvon all he wants. It was a public place after all. Just because you're following someone does not mean you are initiating a confrontation.

[Dr.3D]

He can watch and follow Treyvon all he wants. It was a public place after all. Just because you're following someone does not mean you are initiating a confrontation.

That's right. I should be able to follow someone around all I want without fear they are going to try to kill me.

[talkingpointes]

He can watch and follow Treyvon all he wants. It was a public place after all. Just because you're following someone does not mean you are initiating a confrontation.

Especially when everyone else is at work and he had never seen the person before.

Has anyone else in this thread ever been robbed.

[Zippyjuan]

He is claiming not guilty because of "Stand your Ground". In "Stand your ground" you must feel threatened. If he is following Treyvon, he is obviously not feeling threatened by him.

[Antischism]

"He looked at me... and he called me a 'motherfucker!'"

Man, this is real hard-hitting stuff.

[Zippyjuan]

I agree 1000%.

I did a lot of studying on the whole Trayvon/Zimmerman incident and everything that I have found leads back to Zimmerman not minding his own business and trying to be the bad ass.

They were both Wannabees. Zimmerman wanted to be a tough security guy and Treyvon wanted to pretend to be Gangsta (doesn't mean he did more than pretend though- Zimmerman did more than pretend).

[BlackTerrel]

Curious how a "self defense" theory will work when one person with a gun runs after another unarmed person who was simply walking down the street even after the people at 911 told him not to go after the person. Person with the gun was the one who felt "threatened"? And that fear was somehow eased by running after the other guy rather than staying away from them while the cops were on their way?

That's what I'm wondering. You can't start a fight and then claim self defense when you lose.

[Dr.3D]

That's what I'm wondering. You can't start a fight and then claim self defense when you lose.

Who threw the first punch?

[BlackTerrel]

What the Dr said.

This is a total distraction ploy by media owners.

If it's so irrelevant why are all of us here talking about.

It's irrelevant to you - great. Good for you.

What impacts me personally? I think it's far likelier someone kills me or someone in my family and ends up not charged because of cronyism and/or a racist justice system then of being hurt by a drone or having the NSA spy on my phone calls.

Just because you're above it all doesn't make you superior.

[BlackTerrel]

To sow dissent and make people feel unrepresented. It's a lot easier to rule with people divided.

If they find Zimmerman not guilty people will probably riot. Nothing like Rodney King but I wouldn't doubt some windows get broken and some militarized police officers cracking skulls in badgeless riot gear.

Democracy works best when everyone is at eachother's throats. Blacks, whites, Hispanics - everyone - working together things would change. Keep the groups small and subdivided.

If the powers that be want people divided they're doing a pretty shitty job. Race relations are better than ever and if you look at American history in 10 year increments it's a chart that keeps getting better. We're not that many generations off from slavery and Jim Crow laws. When was the last riot?

Most media, TV, movies, music shows racial harmony.

[BlackTerrel]

So you think that's all fake -- eventhough it's from his OWN phone?

For the record I do have a bias I have been robbed and beaten half to death by 7 black men. Yeah it's hard to not be angry but they did it because I was a "racist". I was best friends with the brother of the guy that lead in the guys that did it. Fact is they were the racist and the criminals, it's easier to call someone else the names and make them the bad guy.

I generally can't stand people that talk like he does -- sorry. It takes me back to being in my room on my knees while one man held a gun to my head and another beat the shit out of me and 5 others kept asking me for a safe.

The second time they raped my gf at the time.(I jumped out my window and ran into a neighbors house) Sorry it was 1 mexican and 4 black guys that I had never met that kicked down my door at 3am in the morning.

For the record I was growing mushrooms. But that didn't make me a criminal, and most certainly not a racist.

If you want me too be really honest. I never spoke to my best friend again and never told him why, and since then it's still hard for me to be around black men. I'm sorry. I didn't want this.

(4 of the first 7 are dead, he's brother was killed with the other 3 two weeks later when they attempted to rob a mexican gangs gun house - I honestly didn't feel bad for him and that was probably the last words we ever shared- I do blame him. I had never, ever met his brother)

That's a great story and all but let's be real here. You can't be impartial. You don't like or want to be around black people - by your own admission. That's by definition collectivist and racist.

[BlackTerrel]

Who threw the first punch?

If you punch someone is that enough to kill you? I've been punched and punched others plenty of times before I hit 18. That's life. Everyone of these should end in a death?

[Dr.3D]

If you punch someone is that enough to kill you? I've been punched and punched others plenty of times before I hit 18. That's life. Everyone of these should end in a death?

In my case, it could end in their death. I'm an old man and if some kid thinks he is going to beat the crap out of me and possibly kill me, I'll end up in court just like Zimmerman.

Edit: And if the person actually says, "I'm going to kill you." That's enough for me to believe him and use lethal force to stop him from doing so.

[ClydeCoulter]

If you punch someone is that enough to kill you? I've been punched and punched others plenty of times before I hit 18. That's life. Everyone of these should end in a death?

I don't think that's what you think it is.

First, if everyone that wanted to carry carried, and did so responsibly, there might be less punching. What's the saying, "Your freedom ends where my nose begins"? And, that has to do with respect for others.

And, there are mutual fist fights, and that's okay. I don't think anyone is saying that every time someone throws a punch it's time to get out the gun. But there are times when you know that someone wants to take your head off, and that's when the gun could come out. But I agree that de-escalation should always be sought when carrying.

[talkingpointes]

That's a great story and all but let's be real here. You can't be impartial. You don't like or want to be around black people - by your own admission. That's by definition collectivist and racist.

No, I said it's hard. But it's not that I don't hang around them, it's that I'm just afraid of when I am. Is that really so bad? If it makes you feel better I'm dating someone of mixed race.

[talkingpointes]

If you punch someone is that enough to kill you? I've been punched and punched others plenty of times before I hit 18. That's life. Everyone of these should end in a death?

Yes, one hit to the temple is enough to kill most men and women. Granted noone is going to throw a hook like that and they are going to kick you in the front of the face, not the side. I have had the left side of my face collapsed besides my cheek and lived. (from the robbery I have pictures-- broken nose, 3 bones around my eye, I thought I was going to be blind, turned out I just need glasses, whew)

[BlackTerrel]

I don't think that's what you think it is.

First, if everyone that wanted to carry carried, and did so responsibly, there might be less punching. What's the saying, "Your freedom ends where my nose begins"? And, that has to do with respect for others.

And, there are mutual fist fights, and that's okay. I don't think anyone is saying that every time someone throws a punch it's time to get out the gun. But there are times when you know that someone wants to take your head off, and that's when the gun could come out. But I agree that de-escalation should always be sought when carrying.

There are always going to be people fighting. We're guys - that's what we do. I'm not 30 yet and when I was a kid they almost never ended with someone getting shot. Now it seems they all do...that benefits no one.

Gun should be used to defend yourself from others similarly armed. Not to escalate the situation.

EDIT: By the way if a cop killed an unarmed man 100% of the people here would say the cop is guilty right? So Zimmerman is innocent because he's not a cop.

[talkingpointes]

This is a non-biased source. I don't think this guy is going be fairly tried no matter what. In the end I don't think he should of fatally shot him, the size difference would make most guys shutter. When someone has a 6' reach on you that's equivalent to fighting stretch armstrong, and good luck unless you can get on the inside. Which Trayvon was -17 I think and his stamina would of made that impossible.

From their age and size differences alone if Zimmerman started it he should receive an involuntary - if he did start it, then premeditated since he followed him.

But his attorney is going to lampoon this girl and destroy any credibility. The will have to try to have whatever they can struck from the record becuase they are so emotionally damning to some people. I would think 50/50 chance of being found guilty.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/zimmerman-witness-gets-twitter-scrub-748092

[Dr.3D]

There are always going to be people fighting. We're guys - that's what we do. I'm not 30 yet and when I was a kid they almost never ended with someone getting shot. Now it seems they all do...that benefits no one.

Gun should be used to defend yourself from others similarly armed. Not to escalate the situation.

EDIT: By the way if a cop killed an unarmed man 100% of the people here would say the cop is guilty right? So Zimmerman is innocent because he's not a cop.

So a guy that's 70 should be able to keep himself from getting beat to death by a guy that's 30 without using a gun? Sorry buddy, I don't plan on spending my life working out in the gym.

[kcchiefs6465]

Just as long as people leave the Jews alone, it is A-OK with this government if everyone else is fighting each other.
Your statement is an example of the problem I was talking about.

We have black, white, Hispanic, Asian, gay, straight, Northerner, Southerner, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists with a likely majority of all groups being good people with the same concerns as you. Many are misguided in their political viewpoints, many propose different solutions, at the end of the day we are faced with the same problems.

That being global rigging of the currency supply, crony-capitalist (borderline fascist) back room deals and a majority of politicians with no spine and no moral code backing their words. No philosophy to speak of, and a thirst for power. I'd imagine the position attracts the type like flies to shit. There are a few exceptions of course but by and large We are unrepresented, propaganda is used to paint a certain narrative for people to follow, and they toe the line. When one gets out of line, a la Snowden, he is harshly dealt with and the band plays on.

We need everyone to wake up. We are marketed to and like products, pimped like whores, and most have no idea what I'm even referring to or think I am being hyperbolic or my rhetoric is out of line. I could make the comparison.

In my opinion this story draws away from what we should be focusing on... that being, what secret is Miley Cyrus threatening her dad with!? I mean, if they expect me to sleep at night with that on my conscience they're very mistaken.

Oh the worth of my fiat is being taken from between my fingertips? Big interests are raping the world over with shady backdoor deals and bribes? Two headed babies?

They'll beat this story for all it's [not] worth and no matter the outcome people will be pissed either way.

[69360]

The kid and the shooter were both dumbasses of the highest order, when they met bad things happened.

The press isn't covering this anymore because the government's case is weak to non-existent and the racebaiters don't like to lose.

[angelatc]

The kid and the shooter were both dumbasses of the highest order, when they met bad things happened.

The press isn't covering this anymore because the government's case is weak to non-existent and the racebaiters don't like to lose.

That's sort of what the original article said, except that he feels the whole thing was dragged into the spotlight to tinge the 2012 election season with racial overtones, and that an acquittal will just be a big race tool for 2014.

Its not that they don't like to lose - they want to lose. But they can't cover this 24/7 because the state's case is so weak, so they're going to ignore it, then feign outrage when the acquittal comes down. (I'm going by what he said - I haven't seen any of the trial.)

[ClydeCoulter]

There are always going to be people fighting. We're guys - that's what we do. I'm not 30 yet and when I was a kid they almost never ended with someone getting shot. Now it seems they all do...that benefits no one.

Gun should be used to defend yourself from others similarly armed. Not to escalate the situation.

EDIT: By the way if a cop killed an unarmed man 100% of the people here would say the cop is guilty right? So Zimmerman is innocent because he's not a cop.

Sorry if I disappoint other males, but that's not what I have ever done. I don't look for nor enjoy fighting other people. I fight myself, what can I accomplish or learn today that I could not, or did not, yesterday. I expect others to take care of themselves, and it's none of my business how as long as they don't infringe on others.

I don't go for the stereotyping of males as fighting others. I don't find it macho to punch and kick or kill.

A cop is in a profession and one that is known to be risky (or should be). He's paid to take a bullet if necessary to protect the innocent (although that is debatable, some say they are only there to enforce the will of the elite, but I digress).

[William R]

America Will See Its Worst Race Riot Yet This Summer

Sanford, FL—Yes, the George Zimmerman trial here has thousands of African-Americans getting ready for some serious bloodletting.
I don’t want to make idle and dire predictions but this nation has never been so divided and racially sensitive. Or African-American President took sides on this case at the very beginning. That ratified a George Zimmerman guilty verdict in the minds of millions.
There’s just one little problem, and that is the murder case should have never been filed. It was filed purely for political reasons despite the fact that it was a simple justifiable

http://www.crimefilenews.com/2013/06/america-will-see-its-worst-race-riot.html

[kcchiefs6465]

After you have someone like Trayvon (a misguided youth) break into your home -- you will be literally eating your words. Trayvon OPENLY bragged on his FB about robbing women.
If Martin broke into Zimmerman's home and Zimmerman shot him I would be defending his right. As it stands, he chased the teen down. I've met Zimmerman's type. I don't like them. There's standing your ground and then there's instigating an incident.

And FWIW, I have been robbed after my house was "broken into." They wrote me a receipt for $212 dollars. (I had over $350 on me, but the 212 was kept anyways so what's the difference. Whether it went towards the court or the cop's personal pocket doesn't change the fact I didn't have it anymore)

So like I said, had Martin broke into someone's house and was shot you wouldn't hear a word edgewise from me. I'm not sure if it's different some places, but staring at someone, asking what their business is etc. is looking for a fight. Zimmerman should have minded his own business. Point blank period.

That is not to say I support the media's overblown bullshit about the case, his kangaroo lawyer, etc. but let's be honest. Mind your own damn business. He didn't see the teen commit any crime.

[kcchiefs6465]

EDIT: By the way if a cop killed an unarmed man 100% of the people here would say the cop is guilty right? So Zimmerman is innocent because he's not a cop.
Well actually, since you mentioned it, if Zimmerman is found guilty it will be because he was not a cop.

[James Madison]

America Will See Its Worst Race Riot Yet This Summer

Sanford, FL—Yes, the George Zimmerman trial here has thousands of African-Americans getting ready for some serious bloodletting.
I don’t want to make idle and dire predictions but this nation has never been so divided and racially sensitive. Or African-American President took sides on this case at the very beginning. That ratified a George Zimmerman guilty verdict in the minds of millions.
There’s just one little problem, and that is the murder case should have never been filed. It was filed purely for political reasons despite the fact that it was a simple justifiable

http://www.crimefilenews.com/2013/06/america-will-see-its-worst-race-riot.html

If welfare-heads wanna burn down their homes and make themselves an even bigger joke than they already are, I won't stop them.

[RickyJ]

America Will See Its Worst Race Riot Yet This Summer

Sanford, FL—Yes, the George Zimmerman trial here has thousands of African-Americans getting ready for some serious bloodletting.
I don’t want to make idle and dire predictions but this nation has never been so divided and racially sensitive. Or African-American President took sides on this case at the very beginning. That ratified a George Zimmerman guilty verdict in the minds of millions.
There’s just one little problem, and that is the murder case should have never been filed. It was filed purely for political reasons despite the fact that it was a simple justifiable

http://www.crimefilenews.com/2013/06/america-will-see-its-worst-race-riot.html

There may or may not be a riot, but if there is a riot then the rioters will be shot just like Trayvon.

[RickyJ]

So a guy that's 70 should be able to keep himself from getting beat to death by a guy that's 30 without using a gun? Sorry buddy, I don't plan on spending my life working out in the gym.

If you got no choice, use your weapon before someone uses it on you. Zimmerman probably did exactly that, and yet on a liberty site we have people wanting his head for this. That is a shame.

[Zippyjuan]

Judge, jury and executioner all in one. No rights- no accusations and trial. How do you know when you are at the point of having no choice? Change "Zimmerman" to "policeman" and watch the comments change. Suddenly he isn't a hero.

[kcchiefs6465]

If the powers that be want people divided they're doing a pretty shitty job. Race relations are better than ever and if you look at American history in 10 year increments it's a chart that keeps getting better. We're not that many generations off from slavery and Jim Crow laws. When was the last riot?

Most media, TV, movies, music shows racial harmony.
I agree. Every generation "race relations" (one of those overused terms that I really don't like to use) has gotten better.

That is not to say a strategy for keeping the people down or preventing a revolt is to divide them into manageable subsections to target with different messages of propaganda.

You'll see what I mean if he is found not guilty, people take to the street, and their heads are cracked open by a multi-racial police force ranging of every hue under the sun.

They will be manageable. Social media and cameras everywhere have changed this mentality, not by much in my opinion.

[fr33]

Judge, jury and executioner all in one. No rights- no accusations and trial. How do you know when you are at the point of having no choice? Change "Zimmerman" to "policeman" and watch the comments change. Suddenly he isn't a hero.

I don't think anyone here is calling Zimmerman a hero. IMO he is an asshole but from the evidence I've seen I couldn't convict him of murder. Too much reasonable doubt surrounding the head-wound.

The difference between this and most police initiated aggression is that we don't have a dash cam or witnesses. The system is supposed to error on the side of innocence. Liberty requires a lot of alert vigilance rather than a careless conviction.

[RonPaulMall]

I don't think anyone here is calling Zimmerman a hero. IMO he is an asshole but from the evidence I've seen I couldn't convict him of murder. Too much reasonable doubt surrounding the head-wound.


Forget reasonable doubt, this case doesn't even have probable cause. There is no evidence that Zimmerman started the fight (Precious' testimony that she "heard" a push and magically could tell through the phone that Zimmerman was the pusher aside). To the contrary, what evidence that exists (wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head) suggest he was the victim. The entire trial is a joke.

[Dr.3D]

Forget reasonable doubt, this case doesn't even have probable cause. There is no evidence that Zimmerman started the fight (Precious' testimony that she "heard" a push and magically could tell through the phone that Zimmerman was the pusher aside). To the contrary, what evidence that exists (wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head) suggest he was the victim. The entire trial is a joke.
I for one would like to know if Martin had any head wounds. Did he have any evidence of having used his fists to strike somebody? So far I have not heard a thing about what wounds other than gunshot wounds Martin had.

[RickyJ]

Judge, jury and executioner all in one. No rights- no accusations and trial. How do you know when you are at the point of having no choice? Change "Zimmerman" to "policeman" and watch the comments change. Suddenly he isn't a hero.

Zimmerman is being railroaded here by the press and people here are cheering it on. Self-defense is still a right in this nation, get use to it because if riots occur like many think they will, there will be a lot of bloodshed. People have had enough and aren't scared of thugs anymore, they are ready to take them down.

[kcchiefs6465]

He can watch and follow Treyvon all he wants. It was a public place after all. Just because you're following someone does not mean you are initiating a confrontation.
Yes, it does.

Try following behind someone, when they stop you stop, when they walk again keep following. The following could end as simple as the person being followed stating "What the fuck are you doing, get away from me." If you continued following and were attacked, I'd say you brought it on yourself.

You don't know why they are following you. They may be setting up to rob you. Liberty to me is you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone, until so far as you encroach on me or my rights. Following me fits into that.

I was being followed around when I was walking. I stopped to light a cigarette, I noticed out of the corner of my eye he stopped too. I start walking again he starts walking again. After two block and turning into a small generally unused alley I stopped and turned around and said "What the fuck do you want?" (I figured the guy was trying to rob me.. how was I to know?) He mumbled something, turned and left.

Later I found out who he was, a schizophrenic who probably thought he was tracking someone or lord knows what. He does it to a lot of people downtown apparently. Hisses and growls at people in his apartment building. This was the first time I ever saw the man, I turned around to see why he was following me and asked him as much. The situation was deescalated.

The point of my story is to say that while following someone incidentally isn't an act of aggression, following someone intentionally is. Or could be construed as as much by the average person. Someone overtly following me or trying to chase me down are going to get what they deserved or rather, asked for.

Public place or not, a reaction should be expected. (of course there are extremes) Martin did the right thing by trying to get away from him.

[kcchiefs6465]

Forget reasonable doubt, this case doesn't even have probable cause. There is no evidence that Zimmerman started the fight (Precious' testimony that she "heard" a push and magically could tell through the phone that Zimmerman was the pusher aside). To the contrary, what evidence that exists (wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head) suggest he was the victim. The entire trial is a joke.
The entire trial is a joke.

That being said, Zimmerman admitted to following the teen. He was breathing heavy as if chasing. He said Martin took off running.

What right does he have to chase him down?

Or rather, what expectation of chasing someone down not resulting in violence is there? He had a gun. He didn't fear for his life. Not until Martin turned around and reasonably fought back at the person chasing him. When he started getting his ass whooped is when he most probably feared for his life.

The fact remains the same that had he not initiated it, he would have never been attacked. His actions led to the death of the teen.

It isn't SYG. Trayvon Martin tried to stand HIS ground. A wannabe pig felt the need to chase him down, received a predictable response, and then shot him. I have no doubt he feared for his life. I can go down the road, harass every person I see, chase people around and question where they are going. If they try to fight me fight and then if I'm losing shoot them and I'm standing my ground? A horrible representation of SYG. He instigated it. What did he expect?

[RickyJ]

Try following behind someone, when they stop you stop, when they walk again keep following. The following could end as simple as the person being followed stating "What the fuck are you doing, get away from me." If you continued following and were attacked, I'd say you brought it on yourself.

If you attack someone because you think they are following you then you are the one that is asking for it. What the heck has happened to people on this forum? Crazy pills or something?

[RickyJ]

Forget reasonable doubt, this case doesn't even have probable cause. There is no evidence that Zimmerman started the fight (Precious' testimony that she "heard" a push and magically could tell through the phone that Zimmerman was the pusher aside). To the contrary, what evidence that exists (wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head) suggest he was the victim. The entire trial is a joke.

Yes it is a joke and a distraction from the Senate passing the immigration/amnesty/H1-B visa bill. They are trying to get this passed while getting people worked up over a self-defense case and we have people here falling for it!

[kcchiefs6465]

If you attack someone because you think they are following you then you are the one that is asking for it. What the heck has happened to people on this forum? Crazy pills or something?
Is that what I said? When I know someone is following me, in other words harassing or impeding my freedom, I will react.

The person who is following me ought to have expected a response.

What's so hard about that to understand?

You see, leave people alone and they leave you alone. What's wrong with that message? Harass people or pester or antagonize, I am not the type to feel sorry. I did say it could be taken to extremes and the implication of my "of course" was to discourage someone from using the hypothetical of "he went down the same road as me so I attacked him." That isn't what I'm saying.

Someone overtly following me, it's only happened once in my lifetime, will get a response. It isn't as if you are trying to fight someone, you are showing them that their behavior is unacceptable. Working through the situation with words is best, of course.

[CPUd]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lldxmpx51lk

[kcchiefs6465]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lldxmpx51lk
Before watching this dude almost got shot right? lmao

It isn't that unhuman a reaction to get upset. :D

I think this is the one.

ETA: This is a different one. The one prank I watched they had a guy screaming apparently on the phone with a girl he slept with's boyfriend. He'd say "Yeah, I'm right here, MF come see what happens" and then say, "Yeah I'm the guy in the white shirt" or whatever describing random people in the store. People got pissed.

Pointless thread derail but hilarious.

[RonPaulMall]

It isn't SYG. Trayvon Martin tried to stand HIS ground. A wannabe pig felt the need to chase him down, received a predictable response, and then shot him. I have no doubt he feared for his life. I can go down the road, harass every person I see, chase people around and question where they are going. If they try to fight me fight and then if I'm losing shoot them and I'm standing my ground? A horrible representation of SYG. He instigated it. What did he expect?

Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with this case. There are two kinds of broad self defense rules that exist a situation where you are being assaulted: Duty to Retreat, or Stand Your Ground. In States that go by Duty to Retreat Doctrine, if you can reasonably and safely disengage from the situation, you have a duty to do so before using deadly force. Typically, in Duty to Retreat states there is an exception for assaults that occur in the home. There is no duty to retreat in your own home. This is sometimes called the Castle Doctrine. In Stand Your Ground states, everywhere a person is legally entitled to be is essentially their castle. There is no duty to retreat anywhere a person is legally entitled to be. If someone attacks you in a way that causes you to fear great bodily harm, you can use deadly force to defend yourself even if you were physically able to safely get away.

But in the Zimmerman case, none of that matters because Zimmerman was on his back with his head being bashed against the sidewalk. Whether the attack happened in a "Duty to Retreat" state or a "Stand Your Ground" state is irrelevant because that is only an issue if Zimmerman was able to safely retreat, which clearly wasn't the case. So stop going on about Stand Your Ground. You are always allowed to use deadly force in a situation in which you can't retreat, are being assaulted, and fear great bodily harm.

The only possible way Zimmerman could lose this case is if the prosecution could show that Zimmerman attacked Trayvon. But they have no evidence to support that. The wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head in fact, suggest the opposite. There is literally nothing to back up the prosecution's charges here.

[Zippyjuan]

Consider you are walking home. You see a guy in a truck staring at you and talking on his phone. You start to walk away. He jumps out of his truck and starts running towards you. What do you do? Figure he is exercising his rights to freely follow whomever he wants?

Getting his head injured does not necessarily mean he did not start the confrontation. It only shows that a physical confrontation did take place before the shooting. Treyvon may have been defending himself. Why didn't Zimmerman stay at his truck? How did he end up close enough to Martin to get hit in the first place? (Martin's route indicated he was headed towards the house he was staying in- his uncle's place). Here is a map. The 7-11 he stopped at is on Oregon Avenue- just outside the upper left corner in this image.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i1055.photobucket.com/albums/s516/freeperphathead/MartinMap.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2866450/posts&h=615&w=720&sz=243&tbnid=kkBiwIF28RaB4M:&tbnh=97&tbnw=114&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dtrevon%2Bmartin%2Bmap%26tbm%3Disch%26 tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=trevon+martin+map&usg=__eckVCAP8qe1-SZajLXoQrl3qn_w=&docid=_B6dMy_UHvJRCM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PjvNUbqmLqjZ0QHhuYDgAQ&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAw&dur=5156
http://i1055.photobucket.com/albums/s516/freeperphathead/MartinMap.jpg

[kcchiefs6465]

But in the Zimmerman case, none of that matters because Zimmerman was on his back with his head being bashed against the sidewalk. Whether the attack happened in a "Duty to Retreat" state or a "Stand Your Ground" state is irrelevant because that is only an issue if Zimmerman was able to safely retreat, which clearly wasn't the case. So stop going on about Stand Your Ground. You are always allowed to use deadly force in a situation in which you can't retreat, are being assaulted, and fear great bodily harm.

The only possible way Zimmerman could lose this case is if the prosecution could show that Zimmerman attacked Trayvon. But they have no evidence to support that. The wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head in fact, suggest the opposite. There is literally nothing to back up the prosecution's charges here.
Meh. Someone chasing another person down, I feel little sympathy when they are attacked. Wannabe pigs are just that, THOSE WITHOUT QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

To be clear, SYG is irrelevant to this case. Zimmerman accosted, that is, chased the teen down after the teen was leaving, and initiated the confrontation. WHETHER TRAYVON THREW THE FIRST PUNCH OR NOT. What right is it of someone to harass another person? I'm not saying Zimmerman very well didn't fear for his life.. many punk, pussy, pigs state the same thing as they shoot down toy dogs and beat men to death. He wasn't one, badged that is, otherwise it wouldn't be an issue. He initiated the conflict. A few lumps, laceration included probably would have taught his ass not to go accosting people.

I know the "police scout" type. The honorary "badge" and whistle. Zimmerman is the epitome of it.

Frankly, let him be found guilty or not guilty. I do not care. I have a reasonable vision of how it went down, he was in the wrong, but whatever. We can all celebrate the victory for freedom, or as you put it, self defense. We can chase kids around the neighborhood and shoot them if they try to fight us.

As if Zimmerman is some kind of symbol of freedom. I couldn't give a damn either way. Justice isn't justice but how close to the regurgitated truth you can get. Be happy with the verdict. I won't particularly, at all really, care.

[Kregisen]

Curious how a "self defense" theory will work when one person with a gun runs after another unarmed person who was simply walking down the street even after the people at 911 told him not to go after the person. Person with the gun was the one who felt "threatened"? And that fear was somehow eased by running after the other guy rather than staying away from them while the cops were on their way?

False. The 911 operator said "you don't have to do that". That is not a command. Just like when a cop asks you to "walk in a straight line", it is VOLUNTARY. A 911 operator has no authority to command you to do anything.

[Zippyjuan]

Actually it was:

Dispatcher

Are you following him?

Zimmerman

Yeah.

Dispatcher

Ok, we don't need you to do that.

Zimmerman

Ok.
http://bizsecurity.about.com/od/creatingpolicies/a/A-Transcript-Of-The-George-Zimmerman-Police-Call.htm

which if an officer says that to you, that means stop doing it- you better quit doing it. Sure you have the option to obey or not to obey- he made the choice to go after Martin. You can listen here: http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-911-call-zimmerman-made-to-sanford-police/vGZq9/

It does sound like he quit running shortly after that but he does say that he would meet the police by the mailboxes (#1 on the map- he was near #2 at the time) but instead ends up going the opposite direction. If Trevon was coming after him, why did the confrontation occur closer to where he was staying rather than closer to where Zimmerman told the cops where he would be? He seems to be still headed home when Zimmerman caught up to him.


Dispatcher

Okay do you want to just meet with them right near the mailboxes then?

Zimmerman

Yeah that's fine.

Dispatcher

Alright George, I'll let them know to meet you around there, okay?


"These assholes- they always get away!" I guess he wanted to make sure Trevon wouldn't get away.

Whose actions seem more agressive? Who seemed to have a more valid reason to fear for their safety?

[RonPaulMall]

"These assholes- they always get away!" I guess he wanted to make sure Trevon wouldn't get away.

Whose actions seem more agressive? Who seemed to have a more valid reason to fear for their safety?

Whether his actions seem "aggressive" or not have nothing to do with the legal charges at hand. Zimmerman says he was assaulted. The physical evidence and witness testimony is consistent with his claim of being on his back getting hit. In such a scenario, he is legally justified in using deadly force to defend himself. Whether you think it was polite or socially proper for him to confront this kid and ask him what he was doing wandering around between houses is irrelevant from a legal perspective. For the prosecution to have a case, they need to provide evidence that Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon. Not that he was bugging him, or that Trayvon found his behavior annoying or obnoxious. Zimmerman has to have physically assaulted him. They have no evidence for that other than Precious' testimony that she "heard" pushing and could "hear" that it was Zimmerman doing the pushing because her keenly developed senses can distinguish who was pushing who over the phone. In other words, they have no evidence. Arguing whether Zimmerman was being rude or needlessly aggressive in his watch over the neighborhood may be valid, but don't belong in this thread as they have nothing to do with the legal question being presented.

[kcchiefs6465]

.... but don't belong in this thread as they have nothing to do with the legal question being presented.
Good points. I'd only add that lawyers and legal positioning have fucked this country six ways from Sunday.

Probably doesn't belong in this thread either as we don't need to determine what was right or wrong, just what can be verbally and 'evidencially' manipulated into reasonable doubt. - Which is a very valid point.

I believe Zimmerman was in the wrong and by and large caused the incident to unfold as it did. In the eyes of the law (lowercase intentional) that is not what matters.

Let's not forget that this is the same law who put a mother in jail for twenty years for firing warning shots at her boyfriend or the many, many, many other injustices perpetrated in Florida. Right and wrong doesn't mean anything in the "justice system." (an oxymoron in itself) Might is right. (might being money, of course) - Why some people get 20 years MMS and some people get off. So I'm clear though, everyone deserves adequate representation and the knock knock joke still was insulting to a seemingly lower than ever possibly thought low "just-us" system. Kangaroos around.

[Ender]

Whether his actions seem "aggressive" or not have nothing to do with the legal charges at hand. Zimmerman says he was assaulted. The physical evidence and witness testimony is consistent with his claim of being on his back getting hit. In such a scenario, he is legally justified in using deadly force to defend himself. Whether you think it was polite or socially proper for him to confront this kid and ask him what he was doing wandering around between houses is irrelevant from a legal perspective. For the prosecution to have a case, they need to provide evidence that Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon. Not that he was bugging him, or that Trayvon found his behavior annoying or obnoxious. Zimmerman has to have physically assaulted him. They have no evidence for that other than Precious' testimony that she "heard" pushing and could "hear" that it was Zimmerman doing the pushing because her keenly developed senses can distinguish who was pushing who over the phone. In other words, they have no evidence. Arguing whether Zimmerman was being rude or needlessly aggressive in his watch over the neighborhood may be valid, but don't belong in this thread as they have nothing to do with the legal question being presented.

Zimmerman wasn't on watch that night- which makes the argument on his aggressiveness absolutely valid; he took things into his own hands when he was asked to stand down.

[Wooden Indian]

Did I wander into the wrong forum? Are people here actually complaining that Zimm DIDN'T listen to the orders of the badged madmen? Can't have it both ways, folks.

[Kregisen]

Actually it was:

http://bizsecurity.about.com/od/creatingpolicies/a/A-Transcript-Of-The-George-Zimmerman-Police-Call.htm

which if an officer says that to you, that means stop doing it- you better quit doing it.[/url]

Uhhh yeah I don't think so.

#1. Since when are 911 operators cops?

#2. You do not need to abide by all commands by cops, because not all are legal.

#3. It wasn't a command, and like I previously said, it's as much of a suggestion as when cops try to get people to do sobriety tests so they can make up stuff to arrest people on a DUI (happened to me before). Suggestions by cops are meaningless in a court of law.

[Wooden Indian]

Careful. Zippy just may report you to our ruling class masters.
You're given an order, you follow that order, civilian!

[AFPVet]

False. The 911 operator said "you don't have to do that". That is not a command. Just like when a cop asks you to "walk in a straight line", it is VOLUNTARY. A 911 operator has no authority to command you to do anything.

Well, not only that, but E911 dispatchers are not law enforcement officers... they are civilians. They have no authority to give you a lawful order.

Was Zimmerman stupid for getting out of his vehicle? Absolutely. Did he deserve to be assaulted like he was? No. When someone has overwhelming physical superiority over you, it doesn't matter if they are unarmed or not. Disparity of force treats that person as if they were armed even if they were not.

Now, if you initiate the confrontation (wanting a fight), then you pretty much screwed yourself because you basically asked for it. The question is did Zimmerman want to fight? If he did not, then he didn't initiate a confrontation.

Zimmerman should have stayed in his vehicle and waited for the cops to come. As a former cop myself, would I get out of my vehicle and 'talk' to a big guy wearing a hoodie? Hell no! You wait until other officers show up. Most officer shootings actually involve the cop being shot with his/her own weapon. There is always at least one gun at every situation... yours. When you get into a fight, guess what, someone might get to your weapon and you're done.

All of this said, being 'suspicious' is not a crime. If this kid was in the process of jacking someone, then, yes... Zimmerman should have jacked him up, but that wasn't the case here. Zimmerman was an idiot, but he was technically justified (official report conclusion of the officers). They had to get a special DA to file charges because the cops knew that he was justified and were not going to file bogus charges (one of the rare cases of this lol).

[gwax23]

Star witness is an imbecile.

Shes illiterate methinks.

[brandon]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57591520-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-neighbor-testifies-trayvon-martin-was-straddling-zimmerman-moments-before-fatal-gunshot/

This case is so over. Unless the jurors are smoking crack, no way a guilty verdict comes down. There's barely even anything to deliberate on.

[dannno]

And the same goes both ways as far as free country. Upon who's authority is Zimmerman entitled to chase down someone and demand their itinerary? I don't think burglaries occurring entitle homeowners to chase down pedestrians and demand their name,address, and family relationships as they are walking through the neighborhood. I am not a buttinski neighbor though and I absolutely detest those that take it upon themselves to interfere in the lives of others. To blame the dead guy for having an illiterate girlfriend by saying it somehow helps the defenses case, well that's sad.

But you have no proof that Zimmerman chased down anybody.. He could have followed him for a while, turned around and then been attacked from behind. In fact, that's pretty much what Zimmerman claimed happened. He claimed he was confronted by skittleboy from behind, turned around and he got attacked. Do you have any evidence that isn't what happened?

[angelatc]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57591520-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-neighbor-testifies-trayvon-martin-was-straddling-zimmerman-moments-before-fatal-gunshot/

This case is so over. Unless the jurors are smoking crack, no way a guilty verdict comes down. There's barely even anything to deliberate on.

Brandon I haven't watched one second of it. Yesterday on Twitter, after the bad witness, a Spanish speaking witness appeared, and Twitter seemed to think that she said Zimmerman was on top of Martin, which meant Zimmerman was lying about the escapade. Did you see any of that?

[dannno]

Whether his actions seem "aggressive" or not have nothing to do with the legal charges at hand. Zimmerman says he was assaulted. The physical evidence and witness testimony is consistent with his claim of being on his back getting hit. In such a scenario, he is legally justified in using deadly force to defend himself. Whether you think it was polite or socially proper for him to confront this kid and ask him what he was doing wandering around between houses is irrelevant from a legal perspective. For the prosecution to have a case, they need to provide evidence that Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon. Not that he was bugging him, or that Trayvon found his behavior annoying or obnoxious. Zimmerman has to have physically assaulted him. They have no evidence for that other than Precious' testimony that she "heard" pushing and could "hear" that it was Zimmerman doing the pushing because her keenly developed senses can distinguish who was pushing who over the phone. In other words, they have no evidence. Arguing whether Zimmerman was being rude or needlessly aggressive in his watch over the neighborhood may be valid, but don't belong in this thread as they have nothing to do with the legal question being presented.

+rep

[dannno]

Zimmerman wasn't on watch that night- which makes the argument on his aggressiveness absolutely valid; he took things into his own hands when he was asked to stand down.

No, you're wrong, read RonPaulMall's post again, it is absolutely 100% correct. This has nothing to do with any authority or neighborhood watch, forget it even exists. You are absolutely 100% wrong that Zimmerman is not allowed to walk around his neighborhood or that some how walking around your neighborhood constitutes a threat to somebody else. Unless Zimmerman attacked Trayvon, which there is no evidence of, then assuming Treyvon attacked Zimmerman which is what the only witness says happened and there is no contradictory evidence to hold Zimmerman for murder.

Once again - NOTHING illegal about walking around your neighborhood, or running for that matter, even if you are walking or running following another individual, unless you threaten them or assault them.

[Ender]

No, you're wrong, read RonPaulMall's post again, it is absolutely 100% correct. This has nothing to do with any authority or neighborhood watch, forget it even exists. You are absolutely 100% wrong that Zimmerman is not allowed to walk around his neighborhood or that some how walking around your neighborhood constitutes a threat to somebody else. Unless Zimmerman attacked Trayvon, which there is no evidence of, then assuming Treyvon attacked Zimmerman which is what the only witness says happened and there is no contradictory evidence to hold Zimmerman for murder.

Once again - NOTHING illegal about walking around your neighborhood, or running for that matter, even if you are walking or running following another individual, unless you threaten them or assault them.

Disagree.

Your premise is wrong. Zimmerman has a track record of an overzealous cop wannabe. He had called 911 many times for no reason and was itching to be a hero.

Trayvon didn't just wander into the community- he had left for a short time and was then coming back to the house he was staying at. If Zimmerman was around at that time, he saw him; if someone else was on watch, they too would have seen him.

The only thing wrong that Trayvon did was to wear a hoodie. Oh the horror!

Zimmerman can walk around his own neighbor, true- BUT to follow/harrass someone else who had already been in the community was negligent on his part, to say the very least.

[dannno]

Disagree.

Your premise is wrong. Zimmerman has a track record of an overzealous cop wannabe. He had called 911 many times for no reason and was itching to be a hero.

That's not evidence of anything that happened. That is character witness stuff that is supposed to ACCOMPANY some evidence of what happened.




Trayvon didn't just wander into the community- he had left for a short time and was then coming back to the house he was staying at. If Zimmerman was around at that time, he saw him; if someone else was on watch, they too would have seen him.

Well he didn't see him, he wasn't on any official 'watch', he just happened to see him on the way home and he thought he was a robber. There had been a lot of robberies, so its no wonder that somebody in the neighborhood was concerned that somebody they didn't know was just walking around the houses in a gated community.



The only thing wrong that Trayvon did was to wear a hoodie. Oh the horror!

ASSumptions make asses out of you and me. According to Zimmerman, Trayvon came up behind him and assaulted him. Is there any witness testimony or evidence contradicting this? Then I rest my case.




Zimmerman can walk around his own neighbor, true- BUT to follow/harrass someone else who had already been in the community was negligent on his part, to say the very least.

Zimmerman had never seen this kid before, again, he was staying there with his dad's fiance or something, he was a new person in the neighborhood.

There is nothing illegal about following somebody and even asking them questions is 100% within the law. If you are trying to tell me that if I ask somebody on the street a question who I have followed and tracked down, they have a right to assault me that is insane. That is basically what you're saying.

[CaptUSA]

The only thing wrong that Trayvon did was to wear a hoodie. Oh the horror!
Do you have proof of that? I mean, there certainly isn't wrong with approaching a stranger in your neighborhood, is there? If Trayvon was approached and took offense or was scared it is possible he assaulted Zimmerman upon his approach.

The problem is that there doesn't seem to be enough evidence to know who did what.

[AFPVet]

Do you have proof of that? I mean, there certainly isn't wrong with approaching a stranger in your neighborhood, is there? If Trayvon was approached and took offense or was scared it is possible he assaulted Zimmerman upon his approach.

The problem is that there doesn't seem to be enough evidence to know who did what.

I talked about this incident extensively with a Florida retired detective friend of mine who stated that down there, the only people wearing hoodies are the thugs (or wannabes). Statistics provide for enough evidence to make this generalization.

Even if Martin wasn't a real 'thug', he was dressing the part.

[angelatc]

I talked about this incident extensively with a Florida retired detective friend of mine who stated that down there, the only people wearing hoodies are the thugs (or wannabes). Statistics provide for enough evidence to make this generalization.

Even if Martin wasn't a real 'thug', he was dressing the part.


If the shooting had happened in July, I'd agree. But this happened in February, and it does get chilly in Florida in the winter, because the humidity makes it seem colder than it is.

[Ender]

I talked about this incident extensively with a Florida retired detective friend of mine who stated that down there, the only people wearing hoodies are the thugs (or wannabes). Statistics provide for enough evidence to make this generalization.

Even if Martin wasn't a real 'thug', he was dressing the part.

When this incident happened some "conservative" forums were all abuzz about how Trayvon deserved it because he was wearing a hoodie. I was teaching at an art school and looked around at my class, who were outstanding students- everyone, including the girls, was wearing a hoodie.

[Antischism]

When this incident happened some "conservative" forums were all abuzz about how Trayvon deserved it because he was wearing a hoodie. I was teaching at an art school and looked around at my class, who were outstanding students- everyone, including the girls, was wearing a hoodie.

Yeah, the argument that people who wear hoodies should be looked at more suspiciously is beyond ridiculous.

[AFPVet]

When this incident happened some "conservative" forums were all abuzz about how Trayvon deserved it because he was wearing a hoodie. I was teaching at an art school and looked around at my class, who were outstanding students- everyone, including the girls, was wearing a hoodie.

It's all about timing. Obviously, you wouldn't wear a ski mask in the summer time just as you wouldn't be wearing a hoodie in the summer time. Granted, the timing of this incident is key.

Let's not dodge the main issue here. As I have said before, being suspicious isn't a crime. I believe there must be a victim in order for there to be a crime. However, wrong or not, Zimmerman got his ass beat by a person who was significantly more powerful and was subsequently fighting for his life. The question is... did he go into the situation looking to fight, or was he just trying to 'talk' to the guy?

[Antischism]

I think I'm just about done with the questioning at the trial of Trayvon's friend. Oh man, they nailed her. Not that it was difficult to do given her apparent tendency to lie and difficulty speaking/reading.

[brandon]

How do the states witnesses get selected? All the ones that I heard helped the defense more than the prosecution. I dont understand why the prosecution would ever subpeona them in the first place... unless they had to for some reason. Anyone know how that works?

[BlackTerrel]

No, I said it's hard. But it's not that I don't hang around them, it's that I'm just afraid of when I am. Is that really so bad? If it makes you feel better I'm dating someone of mixed race.

OK fine. Being around black men scares you. Point being - you're not exactly impartial. You see people as a collective.

[angelatc]

How do the states witnesses get selected? All the ones that I heard helped the defense more than the prosecution. I dont understand why the prosecution would ever subpeona them in the first place... unless they had to for some reason. Anyone know how that works?

You have to remember that the state didn't even want to press charges originally. (Now we know why.) They were pressured into this by the Obama administration looking to gin up racial unrest for the election season.

[brushfire]

I've been "watching" the trial, every day. Even during jury selection. I probably only get about 20% of it, as I'm also doing work. I have seen some unbelievably stupid human beings though. It amazes me that some have enough brain capacity to maintain critical bodily functions (i.e. heart beat, respiration, etc)

I feel horrible for Zimmerman, despite his doing some dumb things, I do believe he's innocent based on the trial thus far. Of course, its alarming that the media is so quiet - they will try to "maximize their investment" in a likely outcry when he is rightfully found innocent.

[QuickZ06]

Reading through this I have a couple of questions for you guys/gals. How many robberies have occurred in the past?

http://www.wagist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/BurglaryReports.pdf


Frank Taaffe, a former neighborhood watch captain, told CNN's "Starting Point" that his house was in the process of being robbed on Feb. 2, but Zimmerman called Sanford police, who thwarted the robbery.

"My house was being robbed, and George on his nightly rounds watched this burglary in progress, called Sanford P.D., waited for them, and helped ensure that nothing bad happened to my house," Taaffe said. "And it's documented in the 911 call for February 2. That was my residence that George Zimmerman helped stop." Zimmerman shot and killed Martin on Feb. 26.

"Neighbor-hood, that's a great word," Taaffe said.

Taaffe said that "young black males" were the perpetrators in the attempted robbery of his home. "We had eight burglaries in our neighborhood all perpetrated by young black males in the 15 months prior to Trayvon being shot," Taaffe said. "It would have been nine."

Taaffe denied that he told the New York Times that burglaries were done by "Trayvon-like dudes with their pants down."

"I never said that," he said. "I never used that term."

But on CNN, Taaffe followed up the denial of an incendiary comment with another one.

When asked if, based on the string of robberies, Zimmerman should have been profiling Trayvon Martin the night of the shooting, Taaffe said: "There's an old saying, 'If you plant corn, you get corn,'"

"It is what it is," he added. "I would go on record by stating that of the eight prior burglaries in the 15 months prior to the Trayvon Martin shooting, all of the perpetrators were young black males."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/zimmerman-neighbor-rash-robberies-young-black-men-trayvon-145647987.html


Also when reading the transcript Zippy posted...


Zimmerman

Okay. These (expletive) they always get away.

So now we ask, was it a smart idea to follow him on foot to make sure he was not getting away as he did look "suspicious" so the police could have a talk with him?

Remember Zimmerman seems like a guy who takes this job pretty seriously as you will see but it does not matter if he is on or off duty. I would think a guy who does these patrols as much as he does, he would tend to notice certain things or certain people out of place thus bringing us to Trayvon Martin.


In all, police have records of 46 calls from Zimmerman since 2004, both to 911 and a nonemergency number, sometimes for reasons as mundane as reporting a pothole blocking a road, as he did in 2005. The sheriff’s office released the records after Sanford police detectives requested them as part of the investigation into Martin’s death, Cannaday said.

The part we do not have a very good understanding of is what exactly happened once the gap (distance) was closed between the two parties.

Also how many robberies have occurred since this incident has happened?

[angelatc]

I've been "watching" the trial, every day. Even during jury selection. I probably only get about 20% of it, as I'm also doing work. I have seen some unbelievably stupid human beings though. It amazes me that some have enough brain capacity to maintain critical bodily functions (i.e. heart beat, respiration, etc)

I feel horrible for Zimmerman, despite his doing some dumb things, I do believe he's innocent based on the trial thus far. Of course, its alarming that the media is so quiet - they will try to "maximize their investment" in a likely outcry when he is rightfully found innocent.

I feel horrible for everybody. That boy shouldn't be dead, but he is.

[QuickZ06]

Could this be a 2nd amendment issue? If more of those homeowners had a gun for home and self defense, would these robberies occur as much as they did? If every neighbor had a sign telling them this, could this whole scenario have been avoided as well as many others?

[RickyJ]

I feel horrible for everybody. That boy shouldn't be dead, but he is.

Well, if had not of attacked a stranger then he would still be alive today. He had a history of attacking people like that, it was bound to happen sooner or later. It is his own fault. He made a bad choice.

[cindy25]

I just hope the inevitable and justified not guilty verdict does not result in race riots

[RickyJ]

You have to remember that the state didn't even want to press charges originally. (Now we know why.) They were pressured into this by the Obama administration looking to gin up racial unrest for the election season.

Civil rights groups, the NAACP, and Jesse Jackson along with a compliant media had a lot to do with it too.

[RickyJ]

I just hope the inevitable and justified not guilty verdict does not result in race riots

I wouldn't be so sure it will be a not guilty verdict. Juries in cases like this tend be irrational.

[HigherVision]

OK fine. Being around black men scares you. Point being - you're not exactly impartial. You see people as a collective.

A black person is statistically much more likely to attack you than a non-black so it's not irrational to be fearful of them. You should be denouncing the violence of other black people for creating this environment where non-blacks are rationally fearful of you.

[RickyJ]

A black person is statistically much more likely to attack you than a non-black so it's not irrational to be fearful of them. You should be denouncing the violence of other black people for creating this environment where non-blacks are rationally fearful of you.

It is not irrational to be guarded around them, or anyone else for that matter until you get to know them, but unless you have more than just skin color to go on, I see no reason to fear them. There is no such thing as a non-violent race of people.

[QuickZ06]

It is not irrational to be guarded around them, or anyone else for that matter until you get to know them, but unless you have more than just skin color to go on, I see no reason to fear them. There is no such thing as a non-violent race of people.

Yep, color does not matter at all. And the laws and police officers do not help black folks out either. The government keeps them uneducated and the stuff they do teach them is to worship the state. The government has created this mess.

[muh_roads]

Is there anything known about the jurors in terms of education level? I remember them saying that not a single one of the OJ Simpson jurors had a college education of any kind and many never even finished high school but just had GED's instead.

[phill4paul]

If I would ever need a jury of peers I would hope that it was selected from members of RPF. Even the ones I don't like.

[RickyJ]

If I would ever need a jury of peers I would hope that it was selected from members of RPF. Even the ones I don't like.

I would want jurors that would not be intimidated and have shown consistency in using logic to come to conclusions. That would rule most people out.

[muh_roads]

I want to be a juror on a non-violent drug offender case. I would do everything I can to make it a hung jury.

[phill4paul]

I would want jurors that would not be intimidated and have shown consistency in using logic to come to conclusions. That would rule most people out.

Jurors are denied or allowed by both prosecution and defense. On a basis of those that are, at least, informed then I would be confident with an RPF jury. I might not always agree but we, here, are smarter than the average bear.

[brushfire]

I feel horrible for everybody. That boy shouldn't be dead, but he is.

Although that is tragic, and I agree it is horrible for such a young man (I wouldn't necessarily call him a boy), I feel worse for the guy who's living. The trial is not over, but so far I believe Zimmerman acted in self defense. Zimmerman's has also become the target of a political campaign, one which has wrongly put him on trial. Granted, Zimmerman is alive, but he will spend his life paying legal fees, and hearing the gurgling gaps of that young man's dying breath.

Also, I think the "boy's" situation is a direct result of a poor decision he made. I believe he sought out Zimmerman, and attacked him while Zimmerman was walking back to his truck. The "boy", quite capable of lethal force, had pulled a bad card from the deck when I decided to ground and pound a man with a gun.

My view of this could very well change, but given the direction this trial has been heading in since Feb 2012, I doubt it. There's probably another 2 weeks left to this trial, we'll see I suppose.

[Nobexliberty]

I might not always agree but we, here, are smarter than the average bear. That does not include me, but I will not have the powers to be on a jury yet.

[Natural Citizen]

I don't understand the fascination with this

[RickyJ]

That does not include me, but I will not have the powers to be on a jury yet.

Are you under 18?

[Nobexliberty]

Are you under 18? Yep, and I am not a citizen of the US either.

[brushfire]

Disagree.

Your premise is wrong. Zimmerman has a track record of an overzealous cop wannabe. He had called 911 many times for no reason and was itching to be a hero.

Trayvon didn't just wander into the community- he had left for a short time and was then coming back to the house he was staying at. If Zimmerman was around at that time, he saw him; if someone else was on watch, they too would have seen him.

The only thing wrong that Trayvon did was to wear a hoodie. Oh the horror!

Zimmerman can walk around his own neighbor, true- BUT to follow/harrass someone else who had already been in the community was negligent on his part, to say the very least.

It was raining and quite unusual to see someone walking in the rain at night. Prior phone activity, and the presence of a community watch program, suggest that there were incidents in the past. Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch volunteer, and nothing like a "Cop Wannabe". On the very calls you cite, you can hear him asking for police, and doing so in a very passive manner. Also, although the dispatch for 911 and non emergency are the same, Zimmerman had called the non-emergency line, as the neighborhood watch protocol required.

Also, where is the harassment? Before I even go into that, I will just urge you to watch the trial. I going to go out on a limb here and guess that you've been getting your "facts" from the ever reliable mainstream media. Your opinion may benefit from getting raw information, directly from the source...

[brushfire]

I don't understand the fascination with this

For me its how the justice system is manipulated to favor a political agenda. If you carry a firearm for personal defense, its quite easy to become a "George Zimmerman". This one has a lot of attention because its a pet trial, but this crap happens all the time. I recall a man's wife shooting 2 intruders, killing one. The media came out and advertised the deceased as "the victim", not releasing the deceased's name, while simultaneously announcing the name and address of the woman (The real victim).

Even more fascinating is how effective the media and government are at duping people - even a savvy bunch like RPF'rs.

[Antischism]

Well, if had not of attacked a stranger then he would still be alive today. He had a history of attacking people like that, it was bound to happen sooner or later. It is his own fault. He made a bad choice.

If you're going to character assassinate a dead man, it might also be relevant to bring up Zimmerman's history in the interest of fairness.

Plenty of people would also bring up the argument that Zimmerman should have been minding his own business instead of playing SUPERHERO COP. If he had refrained and taken the suggestion he got over the phone to back off, none of this would have happened, either.

This is a case where as of now, I still believe both parties were in the wrong. I'm still watching the trial, so my mind can obviously change, but I understand both sides of the argument.

On another note, certain people here have incredibly apparent (self-admitted) racial biases, so they would be very unfit to make a judgment on this case.

[brushfire]

Plenty of people would also bring up the argument that Zimmerman should have been minding his own business instead of playing SUPERHERO COP. If he had refrained and taken the suggestion he got over the phone to back off, none of this would have happened, either.

1. What constitutes "Superhero Cop"? I stopped 2 car loads of vandals (9 teens) from vandalizing my neighbor's house. Does that make me a Superhero Cop too? Or is that only when the media deems me so?

2. Who says he didnt "back off"? He exited his car, but he states that he was walking back, and there is no evidence to the contrary? Even the wind noise in the phone subsides. His location at the "scene" in correlation to other testimony supports that he was on his way back to the truck. Regardless, there's simply no evidence to suggest that he continued to pursue Martin, where are you getting this?

Racist? About the most compelling evidence of "racism" were in Jeantel's testimony - Martin repeatedly referred to Zimmerman as a N**ger, and called him a "Crazy a$$ cracker". So far the closest thing I can see to any racism is an unnecessary description of his neighbor as being "caucasian".

Holy sh!t people?? I challenge you to step beyond the narrative here. Not since Erik Scott have I seen such manipulation of the judicial system.

[RickyJ]

If you're going to character assassinate a dead man, it might also be relevant to bring up Zimmerman's history in the interest of fairness.

Plenty of people would also bring up the argument that Zimmerman should have been minding his own business instead of playing SUPERHERO COP. If he had refrained and taken the suggestion he got over the phone to back off, none of this would have happened, either.

This is a case where as of now, I still believe both parties were in the wrong. I'm still watching the trial, so my mind can obviously change, but I understand both sides of the argument.

On another note, certain people here have incredibly apparent (self-admitted) racial biases, so they would be very unfit to make a judgment on this case.

He was elected by the residents as the captain of the neighborhood watch. What do you want him to do, sit on his ass and do nothing while another burglary could be taking place? Calling the cops is not always good enough, they take forever to respond.

[Kregisen]

Plenty of people would also bring up the argument that Zimmerman should have been minding his own business instead of playing SUPERHERO COP. If he had refrained and taken the suggestion he got over the phone to back off, none of this would have happened, either.

You are saying it's Zimmerman's fault he got attacked (assuming he did get attacked, which is the safest assumption until there is evidence to the contrary) because he wasn't "minding his own business".


You are using the exact same logic as blaming women for getting raped because their clothing was too sexy or too revealing.

In short, your argument is dumb.

Would you be okay if someone shot and killed a 15 year old kid at 2am? "Oh, you were out past curfew, so it's your fault that you died."

Ridiculousness.

[Ender]

He was elected by the residents as the captain of the neighborhood watch. What do you want him to do, sit on his ass and do nothing while another burglary could be taking place? Calling the cops is not always good enough, they take forever to respond.

Neighborhood Watch Organizations that are recognized by the National Sheriffs' Association? In fact, their Executive Director, Aaron D. Kennard, said this in a press statement:

"The alleged action of a 'self-appointed neighborhood watchman' last month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the Neighborhood Watch Program...NSA has no information indicating the community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the NSA Neighborhood Watch program."


From the Florida NWIntro Booklet:

www.hillsboroughcounty.org/onr/.../NWIntrobookletrev610.pdf.pdf

Neighborhood Watch is an “Eyes and Ears” Program

Neighborhood Watch is not a vigilante program. Participants, as private citizens, are only to report their observations of suspicious activity to law enforcement; not to take action themselves. The confrontation, apprehension and/or detention of any suspicious persons observed by participants should be handled by a trained law enforcement officer, empowered to perform law enforcement duties, as outlined under Florida law.

[RickyJ]

Neighborhood Watch Organizations that are recognized by the National Sheriffs' Association? In fact, their Executive Director, Aaron D. Kennard, said this in a press statement:

"The alleged action of a 'self-appointed neighborhood watchman' last month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the Neighborhood Watch Program...NSA has no information indicating the community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the NSA Neighborhood Watch program."


From the Florida NWIntro Booklet:

www.hillsboroughcounty.org/onr/.../NWIntrobookletrev610.pdf.pdf

Neighborhood Watch is an “Eyes and Ears” Program

Neighborhood Watch is not a vigilante program. Participants, as private citizens, are only to report their observations of suspicious activity to law enforcement; not to take action themselves. The confrontation, apprehension and/or detention of any suspicious persons observed by participants should be handled by a trained law enforcement officer, empowered to perform law enforcement duties, as outlined under Florida law.



It doesn't matter what the neighborhood watch program is or isn't. He and everyone else in the community has a right to protect themselves from criminals. The police cannot be relied upon, you call them and they come when they get and good and ready (they eat their last dounghnut at the Dunkin Doughnuts).
People have got killed waiting for the police to arrive. He did what a hero would have done, and this charge of murder and slandering him in the press is what he gets for his good deed?

[tangent4ronpaul]

NSA has no information indicating the community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the NSA Neighborhood Watch program.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/22/article-2221485-15A0C34A000005DC-165_306x423.jpg

WHAAAAAAAA - you didn't join OUR CLUB!!!!

http://www.usaonwatch.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neighborhood_watch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Observer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_Angels
(more at first wikipedia link)

I also remember hearing about some groups in AZ after sandy hook that were training people via the sheriffs dept and I believe holds and citizen arrests were part of it. IIRC, Steven Segal was part of it too.

-t

[kcchiefs6465]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_Angels

I also remember hearing about some groups in AZ after sandy hook that were training people via the sheriffs dept and I believe holds and citizen arrests were part of it. IIRC, Steven Segal was part of it too.

-t
I will applaud the person who stands their ground against the Guardian Angels.

It's funny you'd mention Steven Segal. Wasn't he the one whoring for publicity on the back of the APC running down some guy's gate in the raid that eventually resulted in the killing of all the man's roosters and dog with that gestapo fuck Joe Arpaio?

Why am I not surprised some people applaud this statist organization and statist pig. Did you ever watch his tv show?

Zimmerman probably jerked off to it.

[tangent4ronpaul]

I will applaud the person who stands their ground against the Guardian Angels.

It's funny you'd mention Steven Segal. Wasn't he the one whoring for publicity on the back of the APC running down some guy's gate in the raid that eventually resulted in the killing of all the man's roosters and dog with that gestapo fuck Joe Arpaio?

Why am I not surprised some people applaud this statist organization and statist pig. Did you ever watch his tv show?

Zimmerman probably jerked off to it.

Segal has a TV show or Arpaio has a TV show? - I guess that answers your question - lol!

Didn't hear about the incident with Segal. He's a decent actor, he's into martial arts, Native American philosophy and an environmentalist. That's about all I know about him without looking up his wikipedia page, which I might do later...

My point was that there are lots of neighborhood watch organizations.

Didn't we agree that having neighborhood watch and arming teachers was a lot better for protecting schools than putting a cop in every school?

As to Sheriff Arpaio, I thought he wrote that book about the Sheriff being the top law man, trumping state and feds. Am I confusing him with another sheriff?

I haven't really paid attention to the Zimmerman trial other than briefly looking in. You seem to think he's guilty. All I've seen is a very weak case. I might revise my opinion.

-t

[HigherVision]

There is no such thing as a non-violent race of people.

Maybe not but there's no such thing as an equal amount of violent behavior distributed among the races either, some are statistically more violent than others at least as far as street crime goes. So by the law of averages you have more of a chance being attacked by people of certain races than others.

[Antischism]

1. What constitutes "Superhero Cop"? I stopped 2 car loads of vandals (9 teens) from vandalizing my neighbor's house. Does that make me a Superhero Cop too? Or is that only when the media deems me so?

2. Who says he didnt "back off"? He exited his car, but he states that he was walking back, and there is no evidence to the contrary? Even the wind noise in the phone subsides. His location at the "scene" in correlation to other testimony supports that he was on his way back to the truck. Regardless, there's simply no evidence to suggest that he continued to pursue Martin, where are you getting this?

Racist? About the most compelling evidence of "racism" were in Jeantel's testimony - Martin repeatedly referred to Zimmerman as a N**ger, and called him a "Crazy a$$ cracker". So far the closest thing I can see to any racism is an unnecessary description of his neighbor as being "caucasian".

Holy sh!t people?? I challenge you to step beyond the narrative here. Not since Erik Scott have I seen such manipulation of the judicial system.

1. Well, the argument is that Treyvon was minding his own business until Zimmerman began to stalk him and follow him around. What was Treyvon doing at the time that would make him suspicious enough for Zimmerman to assume he was up to no good and try to take matters into his own hands? The idea is that he seemed to have a disposition to jump into action, which is especially apparent when he says, "Fucking punks... they always get away." But he was dead-set on being a hero that evening and getting the young man, thinking in his mind that he was clearly up to no good. That's one argument, not necessarily my own.

Good for you. Really, that's great. But were you stalking those teens assuming they were going to do bad things before they actually did? Or had they already begun vandalizing when you took action? Had you seen them doing this in the past leading you to conclude they were up to no good again, or did you profile them?

2. And where's your evidence that it was indeed Treyvon Martin who closed the gap between them or that Zimmerman was definitely going back to his car before being "brutally attacked" by Treyvon? Do we even know who threw the first punch or shove? I'm not the one with a horse in this race, you are. I'm still watching the trial and haven't made up my mind entirely as there isn't enough evidence. As it stands, both were in the wrong that evening in my eyes. Or in other words, both did stupid shit.

3. What are you talking about? I've already seen someone in this thread state that they're more wary and/or afraid of black people than any other color. My statement was that people who hold such views would make for terrible jurors in this case.

[Antischism]

You are saying it's Zimmerman's fault he got attacked (assuming he did get attacked, which is the safest assumption until there is evidence to the contrary) because he wasn't "minding his own business".


You are using the exact same logic as blaming women for getting raped because their clothing was too sexy or too revealing.

In short, your argument is dumb.

Would you be okay if someone shot and killed a 15 year old kid at 2am? "Oh, you were out past curfew, so it's your fault that you died."

Ridiculousness.

Way to selectively read. I was merely stating what some people believe to be the case; I haven't made up my mind yet (I may never), I'm still watching the trial. As things are, I'm still of the opinion both were in the wrong in one way or another.

[kcchiefs6465]

Segal has a TV show or Arpaio has a TV show? - I guess that answers your question - lol!

Arpaio makes appearances on a few shows documenting tent city. He put someone in the hole for saying the conditions were shitty. "Talking back." Steven Segal had a reality television show called "Lawman" (IIRC) He routinely treated people like shit, harassing people, and acting as if he is some sort of bad ass.



Didn't hear about the incident with Segal. He's a decent actor, he's into martial arts, Native American philosophy and an environmentalist. That's about all I know about him without looking up his wikipedia page, which I might do later...

He did a publicity stunt raid with Joe Arpaio over alleged cockfighting. (a misdemeanor) They used an APC to run down the man's gate and it was highly publicized. It was done to promote his new show. In the process somehow all of the man's roosters were euthanized and his puppy shot and killed. As far as I remember the charges were dropped or possibly pled out? Can't recall the exact circumstances. Segal and Arpaio were sued for the raid which the defendant said was unwarranted and excessive.



My point was that there are lots of neighborhood watch organizations.

Didn't we agree that having neighborhood watch and arming teachers was a lot better for protecting schools than putting a cop in every school?

Indeed. My idea of freedom is not a group of wannabe pigs accosting and interrogating anyone they wish walking down that particular section of street. It is the antithesis of freedom. An example would be the Guardian Angels who routinely stops people and expects the people they accost to be required to answer their question. They routinely mace and hit people who tell them to fuck off. (rightfully so) I don't know how someone hasn't opened fired on those cocksuckers by now. (Stood Their Ground.. against illegal detention and a tyrannical wannabe pig mob) I don't know if you've ever seen the show "COPS." That was where I first seen the group. They are a street gang harassing average citizens and ought not be tolerated. They are worse than the police and whose antics should not be tolerated in a free society.



As to Sheriff Arpaio, I thought he wrote that book about the Sheriff being the top law man, trumping state and feds. Am I confusing him with another sheriff?

I am not too sure. You are probably correct. In either case he is a statist pig whose policies are despicable. I am not even referring to the gestapo "papers please" tactics. I am referring to everything else he has done. I've wrote pages on it. Before retyping I would want to try and find it and paste it. A few grievances, aside from putting people in the hole for free speech, bragging his dog's dog food costs more than jail inmate food, failing to investigate hundreds of child molestation cases (sometimes whatsoever, many times never followed up on), his tent camp, the targeting of political opponents with bullshit child pornography charges, (quite a few) and in general his entire attitude. (not to mention the publicity stunts with Steven Segal etc.)

The man is elected by scared old people. People who espouse their "law and order" (what a joke) views on everything from locking up them dirty dopers to making sure every Mexican has their papers present. By and large a disgusting section of society.



I haven't really paid attention to the Zimmerman trial other than briefly looking in. You seem to think he's guilty. All I've seen is a very weak case. I might revise my opinion.
-t
I haven't either. This thread is about the only time I've ever talked about it. I believe he is guilty of instigating the confrontation. He reminds me of the Guardian Angels, the Steven Segals, the nosy fuck up the road who watches and calls the police every two damn days for whatever the petty reason. I know their type. They don't represent freedom, in fact, they represent quite the opposite and I really couldn't find sympathy for them if I tried. (except to say they deserve adequate representation when one of their antagonistic bullshit harassments turns violent or in this deadly) The state's case might be weak and he very well me let go, that has nothing to do with my opinion. Reasonable doubt before sentencing a man to up to decades in prison in a "court of law" and reasonable doubt for me to say it was his actions that directly led to the death of this teen are two entirely different things. Not that Martin wasn't possibly in the wrong. What right have you to follow around someone and ask or demand answers from someone? To follow and harass someone? You have none.

People should be responsible for their own safety, their own property. Neighbors seeing a crime being committed and acting is entirely separate from accosting or following people around like you're Inspector Gadget or a piglet demanding answers to your inquiries.

You know what the Guardian Angels remind me of? Wannabe gangstas of wannabe gangstas. "What hood you from Blood?" equates to "Where do you live and what are your reasons for being here?" They both accost people for walking down certain sections of road to question them. Depending your answer you may beat or detained and at the least harassed. I fail to see liberty in the concept.

You leave me be and I'll leave you be. That's freedom. I have a theory that people are authoritarian in nature and wish to exert petty power over other people. They get off on it. That and they are trained to be nosy since day one in the womb listening to what celebrity gossip and petty conversation. I'll probably end up moving to the mountains or far into the country. Surburbia doesn't sound too appealing, all things considered.

[kcchiefs6465]

Maybe not but there's no such thing as an equal amount of violent behavior distributed among the races either, some are statistically more violent than others at least as far as street crime goes. So by the law of averages you have more of a chance being attacked by people of certain races than others.
Some are statistically more likely to live in metropolitans where all of policy, at the end of the day, bubbles down to that cesspool and breeds misery, poverty and violence.

Take cities (population greater than 250,000 or so) out of the equation and let me know what the statistics look like.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Some are statistically more likely to live in metropolitans where all of policy, at the end of the day, bubbles down to that cesspool and breeds misery, poverty and violence.

Take cities (population greater than 250,000 or so) out of the equation and let me know what the statistics look like.

soo true!
+rep

As to Areaio and the Guardian Angles, don't follow either much. I'd heard of the tent city. Might have even seen a brief news clip about it.
Assuming you've lived in NYC and AZ? These things are often reported more locally than nationally - or maybe they are just off my radar.

-t

[kcchiefs6465]

soo true!
+rep

As to Areaio and the Guardian Angles, don't follow either much. I'd heard of the tent city. Might have even seen a brief news clip about it.
Assuming you've lived in NYC and AZ? These things are often reported more locally than nationally - or maybe they are just off my radar.

-t
I've lived in AZ, never in NYC but have traveled there a couple times.

I first saw the Guardian Angels on a COPS episode 10-12 years ago. (they have branches all over the US) They stopped a man to ask him what he was doing in that neighborhood and where he lived. They said he walked off and "acted suspiciously." They tackled him, maced him, searched him and found a small amount of drugs. They detained the man until the cops came and took the guy into custody. Even back then when I saw it I was disgusted by their attitude and tactics. They are a street gang that harasses people of certain neighborhoods asking questions that are not required to be answered. They will physically accost you if you simply walk by them or tell them to mind their own damn business. I see little difference with them and other street gangs that do that same thing. If there is a crime in progress that is one thing but just to randomly stop people like that, that is an entirely different matter. You can find pictures of them looking hard, fists clenched in fighting stances. What a joke.

I first saw Sheriff Joe on the documentary "Drug War: America's Last White Hope." He was bragging about feeding his inmates on less of a budget than they feed the K9s. He reminded me of a few other "law and order" types I've met (authoritarians) and I was not impressed. I watched a few other documentaries on tent city and I've been following a couple of the lawsuits. He has had Judges charged with child pornography or DUIs and ruined careers of four or five political dissidents. I remember Steven Segal's show and the commercial showed him with Arpaio on an APC in fully militarized SWAT gear. I watched the show a few times and Steven Segal is a spitting example of why I despise cops. Granted the show may have been scripted and he was just trying to show off to the law and order types of being a bad ass. I heard a year or so later that a dog was shot during the raid and all the chickens put down. (that was the premise of the raid, to save the animals) I just despise the mentality a lot of people seem to have of having right over another person.

Freedom to me, in its simplest form or definition is, you leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. As long as you aren't infringing on anyone's rights, that is. Some of these guys think they are fighting a war. If it was up to them they'd turn this country into a prison to enforce their code of "morality." (which isn't moral at all, they are just twisted in the head or authoritarians by blood)

[Zippyjuan]

It doesn't matter what the neighborhood watch program is or isn't. He and everyone else in the community has a right to protect themselves from criminals. The police cannot be relied upon, you call them and they come when they get and good and ready (they eat their last dounghnut at the Dunkin Doughnuts).
People have got killed waiting for the police to arrive. He did what a hero would have done, and this charge of murder and slandering him in the press is what he gets for his good deed?

What criminal activity was Martin involved in? He bought a drink and some Skittles at the 7-11 and was walking home to his uncle's place where he was staying. That is it. What "threat" was Zimmerman protecting his property from? Is it a "Good deed" to follow neighbors around?


People have got killed waiting for the police to arrive. He did what a hero would have done, and this charge of murder and slandering him in the press is what he gets for his good deed?

Zimmerman was the one with the gun and nobody had threatened him. If he had waited for the police, nobody would have been killed in this sitiuation.

[angelatc]

Well, if had not of attacked a stranger then he would still be alive today. He had a history of attacking people like that, it was bound to happen sooner or later. It is his own fault. He made a bad choice.

He was walking home from 7-11 with a cold drink and some candy. If Zimmerman hadn't seen him, none of this would have happened. It's just a tragedy.

If the colors were reversed, we would not blame the kid one bit for thinking he was about to get robbed or beaten and confronting his stalker.

[belian78]

Zimmerman was the one with the gun and nobody had threatened him. If he had waited for the police, nobody would have been killed in this sitiuation.

I can't believe that I'm actually agreeing with Zippy. Mark the calendar folks. But he's right, this is the simple truth. Had Zimmerman not tried to be a hero, and left Martin alone, Martin would be alive today and Zimmerman wouldn't find himself in jail.

[Kregisen]

I've lived in AZ, never in NYC but have traveled there a couple times.

I first saw the Guardian Angels on a COPS episode 10-12 years ago. (they have branches all over the US) They stopped a man to ask him what he was doing in that neighborhood and where he lived. They said he walked off and "acted suspiciously." They tackled him, maced him, searched him and found a small amount of drugs. They detained the man until the cops came and took the guy into custody. Even back then when I saw it I was disgusted by their attitude and tactics. They are a street gang that harasses people of certain neighborhoods asking questions that are not required to be answered. They will physically accost you if you simply walk by them or tell them to mind their own damn business. I see little difference with them and other street gangs that do that same thing. If there is a crime in progress that is one thing but just to randomly stop people like that, that is an entirely different matter. You can find pictures of them looking hard, fists clenched in fighting stances. What a joke.

I first saw Sheriff Joe on the documentary "Drug War: America's Last White Hope." He was bragging about feeding his inmates on less of a budget than they feed the K9s. He reminded me of a few other "law and order" types I've met (authoritarians) and I was not impressed. I watched a few other documentaries on tent city and I've been following a couple of the lawsuits. He has had Judges charged with child pornography or DUIs and ruined careers of four or five political dissidents. I remember Steven Segal's show and the commercial showed him with Arpaio on an APC in fully militarized SWAT gear. I watched the show a few times and Steven Segal is a spitting example of why I despise cops. Granted the show may have been scripted and he was just trying to show off to the law and order types of being a bad ass. I heard a year or so later that a dog was shot during the raid and all the chickens put down. (that was the premise of the raid, to save the animals) I just despise the mentality a lot of people seem to have of having right over another person.

The cops in AZ in general are the worst (esp Gilbert). Almost every encounter I have I'm dealing with an asshole. One time I got arrested for DUI. I agreed to 1 sobriety test and afterwards turned the rest down. On the sobriety test I did do (HGN = follow the light) he wrote down I had all 6 cues of impairment, which is the MAXIMUM you can fail it. (if you get 6 cues you have an 80% chance of being over .1 BAC, which is a ton) He also wrote down as I was trying to stand still talking to him, I was swaying back and forth 2.5 inches. He also said my eyes were bloodshot red and that he smelled moderate amount of alcohol on me. And he pulled me over for what he claims was my wheel going over a line as I was turning. He arrested and me and towed my car (was not required to)

Got my blood drawn at a DUI station and 3 months later it came back as .01. Virtually sober. The guy did not exaggerate, he literally made everything up.

If I actually was driving under the influence? I would have gone to Tent City to be sheriff joe's bitch. Joe is an attention whore who loves wasting public funds on whatever he can.

[RonPaulMall]

I can't believe that I'm actually agreeing with Zippy. Mark the calendar folks. But he's right, this is the simple truth. Had Zimmerman not tried to be a hero, and left Martin alone, Martin would be alive today and Zimmerman wouldn't find himself in jail.

And had Martin not gone to buy Skittles, he'd probably be alive today. That's a simple truth too. So what? Zimmerman was doing community watch in his high crime neighborhood. He saw a suspicious looking kid walking between houses in the rain and went out to investigate. He's allowed to do that. And if the person he confronts acts like an animal and punches him in the face and hops on top of him, he's allowed to put that animal down.

[Kregisen]

And had Martin not gone to buy Skittles, he'd probably be alive today. That's a simple truth too. So what? Zimmerman was doing community watch in his high crime neighborhood. He saw a suspicious looking kid walking between houses in the rain and went out to investigate. He's allowed to do that. And if the person he confronts acts like an animal and punches him in the face and hops on top of him, he's allowed to put that animal down.

Please stop, you're making way too much sense.

Here, take my rep.

[Ender]

And had Martin not gone to buy Skittles, he'd probably be alive today. That's a simple truth too. So what? Zimmerman was doing community watch in his high crime neighborhood. He saw a suspicious looking kid walking between houses in the rain and went out to investigate. He's allowed to do that. And if the person he confronts acts like an animal and punches him in the face and hops on top of him, he's allowed to put that animal down.

That's total BS.

It's amazing how people will defend Zimmerman's right to follow someone around and scare the hell out of them in the name of "taking care of the neighborhood" (which is AGAINST all Neighborhood Watch rules, BTW), while astounded on another thread on the forum about plainclothes cops who confronted and attacked girls over a pack of water.

Either they are both right or both wrong.

Talk about not understanding freedom-

[kahless]

That's total BS.

It's amazing how people will defend Zimmerman's right to follow someone around and scare the hell out of them in the name of "taking care of the neighborhood" (which is AGAINST all Neighborhood Watch rules, BTW), while astounded on another thread on the forum about plainclothes cops who confronted and attacked girls over a pack of water.

Either they are both right or both wrong.

Talk about not understanding freedom-

Another total reliance on law enforcement poster. This case in the national spotlight is having the intended propaganda effect.

[belian78]

And had Martin not gone to buy Skittles, he'd probably be alive today. That's a simple truth too. So what? Zimmerman was doing community watch in his high crime neighborhood. He saw a suspicious looking kid walking between houses in the rain and went out to investigate. He's allowed to do that. And if the person he confronts acts like an animal and punches him in the face and hops on top of him, he's allowed to put that animal down.
That's utter bullshit. I read these forums everyday and read people demonize cops/security/any authority figure for the 'guilty before proven innocent' mindset. Yet here Zimmerman takes that mentality and he's a frickin neighborhood hero and a victim to some thug? Forgive my language but fuck that. Dude followed a kid walking home. So what that it was raining, I walk around in the rain all the damn time, and in hoodies. Does that mean I need to be harrassed? Just cause I'm walking in the raid with a hoodie on? Again, fuck that.

Zimmerman was being an authoritarian prick, pushed and issue and created a situation that he couldn't handle. Then he took Martin's life because of the situation that HE created for HIMSELF. That wasn't self defense.

[Ender]

Another total reliance on law enforcement poster. This case in the national spotlight is having the intended propaganda effect.

Read much? Comprehension problem?

If it is wrong for plainclothes cops to suddenly confront girls over what they perceive as beer- then it is also wrong for a plainclothes citizen to follow and scare the hell out of someone walking down the street.

Zimmerman was the one that wanted the NW; HE is the one that started it in his community; HE is the one with a violent background; HE is the one that didn't keep to the rules of the NW that HE instigated.

[belian78]

Another total reliance on law enforcement poster. This case in the national spotlight is having the intended propaganda effect.
How the hell does pointing out the hypocrisy showing total reliance on the law enforcement? Oh right, it doesn't.

[RonPaulMall]

That's total BS.

It's amazing how people will defend Zimmerman's right to follow someone around and scare the hell out of them in the name of "taking care of the neighborhood" (which is AGAINST all Neighborhood Watch rules, BTW), while astounded on another thread on the forum about plainclothes cops who confronted and attacked girls over a pack of water.

Either they are both right or both wrong.

Talk about not understanding freedom-

I would argue you are the one who doesn't understand freedom if you can equate pulling a gun on a bunch of girls in a parking lot because you don't like the voluntary business transaction they just conducted with the store owner with a guy approaching a suspicious character in his own neighborhood to ask what said character is up to. The former is an example of a police state and a violation of the non aggression principle on more than one level. The latter is the sort of organic voluntaryist service that develops naturally, and notably doesn't violate the non aggression principle at all.

[Ender]

That's utter bullshit. I read these forums everyday and read people demonize cops/security/any authority figure for the 'guilty before proven innocent' mindset. Yet here Zimmerman takes that mentality and he's a frickin neighborhood hero and a victim to some thug? Forgive my language but fuck that. Dude followed a kid walking home. So what that it was raining, I walk around in the rain all the damn time, and in hoodies. Does that mean I need to be harrassed? Just cause I'm walking in the raid with a hoodie on? Again, fuck that.

Zimmerman was being an authoritarian prick, pushed and issue and created a situation that he couldn't handle. Then he took Martin's life because of the situation that HE created for HIMSELF. That wasn't self defense.

Amen, Brother!

Zimmerman is at least guilty of utter stupidity.

[belian78]

I would argue you are the one who doesn't understand freedom if you can equate pulling a gun on a bunch of girls in a parking lot because you don't like the voluntary business transaction they just conducted with the store owner with a guy approaching a suspicious character in his own neighborhood to ask what said character is up to. The former is an example of a police state and a violation of the non aggression principle on more than one level. The latter is the sort of organic voluntaryist service that develops naturally, and notably doesn't violate the non aggression principle at all.
You do not have a right to walk up to someone that is doing nothing wrong and demanding anything of them!!! I don't care if you were beaten senseless everyday by people in hoodies, just cause you see someone walking with a hoodie, that doesn't give you the right to treat them like they are a criminal when they have done no wrong to anyone. That makes you the aggressor, and you in the wrong.

[Ender]

I would argue you are the one who doesn't understand freedom if you can equate pulling a gun on a bunch of girls in a parking lot because you don't like the voluntary business transaction they just conducted with the store owner with a guy approaching a suspicious character in his own neighborhood to ask what said character is up to. The former is an example of a police state and a violation of the non aggression principle on more than one level. The latter is the sort of organic voluntaryist service that develops naturally, and notably doesn't violate the non aggression principle at all.

Again, utter BS.

Who has the right to call anyone suspicious? Is this the Minority Report?

Zimmerman broke the rules that HE rallied for, and got someone killed who was not doing him, or anyone else, any harm.

[RonPaulMall]

You do not have a right to walk up to someone that is doing nothing wrong and demanding anything of them!!! I don't care if you were beaten senseless everyday by people in hoodies, just cause you see someone walking with a hoodie, that doesn't give you the right to treat them like they are a criminal when they have done no wrong to anyone. That makes you the aggressor, and you in the wrong.

Actually I do have the right to walk up to anybody I want and demand something from them. Just as that person has the right to refuse my demands and tell me to buzz off. Having conversations with strangers is not "aggression". Aggression is when you respond to a stranger's queries by punching them in the face.

[belian78]

Actually I do have the right to walk up to anybody I want and demand something from them. Just as that person has the right to refuse my demands and tell me to buzz off. Having conversations with strangers is not "aggression". Aggression is when you respond to a stranger's queries by punching them in the face.
If you come up to me and treat me like a criminal when I'm walking home, you are the one that is initiating aggression towards me. I'm going to tell you to fuck off and if you press the issue I'm gonna break your nose. So I deserve to have my life taken from me, when I was the one walking not harming anyone, and you are the one that aggressed against me!?

[belian78]

Seriously, that last reply blows my mind. You can walk up to anyone, at anytime for any reason and demand them tell you what they are doing and that's supposed to be ok? Really!? Antagonizing someone until they attack you physically, then killing them in 'self defense' is ok!? That's exactly what the fuck our government does to every other third world nation in the world, and we scream for our 'leaders' to be tried for war crimes for god's sake! But in this case it's ok?

My mind is blown.

[aGameOfThrones]

If you come up to me and treat me like a criminal when I'm walking home, you are the one that is initiating aggression towards me. I'm going to tell you to fuck off and if you press the issue I'm gonna break your nose. So I deserve to have my life taken from me, when I was the one walking not harming anyone, and you are the one that aggressed against me!?

Not if it's a cop. http://images.wikia.com/glee/images/3/38/BA-ZING.gif

[belian78]

Not if it's a cop. http://images.wikia.com/glee/images/3/38/BA-ZING.gif
You seem to be under the impression that I wouldn't defend myself against wrongful arrest.

[aGameOfThrones]

You seem to be under the impression that I wouldn't defend myself against wrongful arrest.



There is a high probability you wont be able to.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

You seem to be under the impression that I wouldn't defend myself against wrongful arrest.

nice knowing ya, and your dog

[Ender]

If you come up to me and treat me like a criminal when I'm walking home, you are the one that is initiating aggression towards me. I'm going to tell you to fuck off and if you press the issue I'm gonna break your nose. So I deserve to have my life taken from me, when I was the one walking not harming anyone, and you are the one that aggressed against me!?

Apparently.:rolleyes:

Freedom of travel does not seem to be comprehended by some so-called "liberty lovers".

[Ender]

Not if it's a cop. http://images.wikia.com/glee/images/3/38/BA-ZING.gif

So, if its wrong for a cop, why is it right for a mundane?

[Dr.3D]

So, if its wrong for a cop, why is it right for a mundane?
Cuz we don't have a badge, silly.

:D

[kahless]

I would argue you are the one who doesn't understand freedom if you can equate pulling a gun on a bunch of girls in a parking lot because you don't like the voluntary business transaction they just conducted with the store owner with a guy approaching a suspicious character in his own neighborhood to ask what said character is up to. The former is an example of a police state and a violation of the non aggression principle on more than one level. The latter is the sort of organic voluntaryist service that develops naturally, and notably doesn't violate the non aggression principle at all.

^This.

If someone is walking around under the over hang of my house or my neighbors house and I ask them "do you live here?" That is not aggression.

I applaud any of my neighborhoods if they do the same for me.

I have been questioned by neighbors in the middle of night walk that were new to the area and did not know who I was. I did not attack them or start to throw punches. We had a normal conversation.

[rpfocus]

Seriously, that last reply blows my mind. You can walk up to anyone, at anytime for any reason and demand them tell you what they are doing and that's supposed to be ok? Really!? Antagonizing someone until they attack you physically, then killing them in 'self defense' is ok!? That's exactly what the fuck our government does to every other third world nation in the world, and we scream for our 'leaders' to be tried for war crimes for god's sake! But in this case it's ok?

My mind is blown.

LOL don't forget this is supposed to be the liberty and freedom crowd.

[kahless]

LOL don't forget this is supposed to be the liberty and freedom crowd.

Liberty and freedom to be safe in your home without hoodlums creeping around the windows of my house. If someone is doing that your damn right I am going to question them.

[kcchiefs6465]

This thread is full of fail.

[rpfocus]

And after you're done chasing down a (much smaller) high schooler for daring to walk down your street, and he turns around and beats your ass, you can just shoot them, right? Comical. Liberty indeed.

[kahless]

And after you're done chasing down a (much smaller) high schooler for daring to walk down your street, and he turns around and beats your ass, you can just shoot them, right? Comical. Liberty indeed.

Amazing that some people think it is wrong to question someone that is creeping around the windows of a house. Obviously big difference from the bullshit you just posted.

[kcchiefs6465]

Amazing that some people think it is wrong to question someone that is creeping around the windows of a house. Obviously big difference from the bullshit you just posted.
It was my understanding he was walking down the street. "Creeping around the windows".... "creeping."

I see what you did there.

[AuH20]

Did Zimmerman lay a finger on Martin before Martin proceeded to attack him??????? That's the million dollar question. If not, then no violation of the sacred non-aggression principle.

[rpfocus]

Amazing that some people think it is wrong to question someone that is creeping around the windows of a house. Obviously big difference from the bullshit you just posted.

Because you're completely shifting the narrative. Zimmerman's call was about a 'suspicious' person walking about, not someone 'creeping around the windows of a house'. Zimmerman 'questioned him', Zimmerman chased him down (in defense? lol), rightfully got his ass kicked when he caught up to him, then shot him.

There's not much chance at rational debate on this issue though. Way to much bigotry lurking under the surface.

[AuH20]

Now regarding the psychological profile of Martin, based off reports, I suspect he was your typical punk kid (irrespective of race I might add; ignorance and bravado is a youth calling card) that thought he was mightier than the world and invulnerable to anything. We usually pick up the remains of these type of kids off the Southern State Parkway after they recklessly speed around blind turns and end up dismembering themselves & their vehicle.

Martin being of the larger stature, thought he would teach the much smaller Zimmerman a stark lesson by beating him into a coma for dare questioning him. However, as we all know, life tends to throw one a curveball from time to time, which Martin found out firsthand. With that said, maybe the most appropriate sentencing if anything, would be a lesser manslaughter charge for Zimmerman.

[kcchiefs6465]

Did Zimmerman lay a finger on Martin before Martin proceeded to attack him??????? That's the million dollar question. If not, then no violation of the sacred non-aggression principle.
As far as I'm concerned, interrogating someone as to where they live and their reasons for being on "your" street is aggression. Chasing someone down is aggression. If the person didn't take heed to the warning of "Leave me the fuck alone," or "None of your damn business" and continued following or harassing the person and the person being harassed turned around and defended himself, that's to be expected and the results of which are to blame on the aggression of the person following/harassing. That's the million dollar question - Did Zimmerman do that, as the 9-1-1 call and area where the fight took place seems to indicate, or was he walking back to his car and the "creeper" ran over and attacked him for no reason? (as the 9-1-1 call and area of the fight seem to rule out)

[Dr.3D]

Did Zimmerman lay a finger on Martin before Martin proceeded to attack him??????? That's the million dollar question. If not, then no violation of the sacred non-aggression principle.
That's right. I find it interesting how many people here seem to believe it's okay to just walk up to somebody and punch them in the face.

[kahless]

It was my understanding he was walking down the street. "Creeping around the windows".... "creeping."

I see what you did there.

Not saying he was but was specifically referring to the exaggeration and never questioning someone which I think is ridiculous.

According to wikipedia Zimmerman said the guy was walking behind the town homes instead of on the street or the sidewalk in a neighborhood which had break-ins.

If true and he was acting suspiciously as claimed by Zimmerman, why not stop and have a conversation.

[kcchiefs6465]

That's right. I find it interesting how many people here seem to believe it's okay to just walk up to somebody and punch them in the face.
If someone is following me (harassing, menacing) they could very well be fended off. That is not simply walking up and punching someone in the face. Discouraging further harassment is actually quite a reasonable response. Of course I would ask (and have) why they were following me.

There are neighborhoods like that, you know. Where you are stopped because of the colors of your clothes and asked where you live.. what you're doing there, who you know. If you try to run you are chased down. (gang neighborhoods) You'd be singing a different tune if a white kid defended himself from that sort of harassment by a black man. Most people here would. Now, I myself, I'd be singing the same tune of that the person minding his own business walking down the road has every reasonable expectation of not being harassed. This is America. I'll walk down any damn road I wish. You come chasing after me or asking who I know, I'll rightfully tell you none of your goddamn business, depending tone and the reason for your inquiry. You continue following me or harassing me, I will rightfully fend you off. (i.e. punch them in the face)

[rpfocus]

Martin being of the larger stature, thought he would teach the much smaller Zimmerman a stark lesson by beating him into a coma for dare questioning him.


Per Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin)
Zimmerman height and weight: 5'9" 200lbs
Martin height and weight: 6'0" 160lbs

Hmm I wouldn't call Martin's 3 inches in height an advantage over Zimmerman's extra 40 pounds. Could be why Martin chose to run, and Zimmerman had to chase him down "in defense."

[belian78]

Amazing that some people think it is wrong to question someone that is creeping around the windows of a house. Obviously big difference from the bullshit you just posted.

He wasn't 'creeping around windows', he was walking home. He wasn't bothering anyone and as such, he's protected under the 4th amendment to not be stopped by douchebags treating him like a criminal when he's not doing anything wrong.

[AuH20]

Zimmerman height and weight: 5'9" 200lbs
Martin height and weight: 6'0" 160lbs

Hmm I wouldn't call Martin's 3 inches in height an advantage over Zimmerman's extra 40 pounds. Could be why Martin chose to run, and Zimmerman had to chase him down "in defense".

Martin was an active football player, while Zimmerman was a doughy & out of shape dwarf. I suspect the muscle mass comparison was heavily skewed into Trayvon's direction, due to his youth and body type. If anyone ran into George Zimmerman in a dark alleyway, they would probably giggle.

[belian78]

That's right. I find it interesting how many people here seem to believe it's okay to just walk up to somebody and punch them in the face.

I'm amazed at how people here think it's ok to walk up to someone walking down the street and give them the gestapo treatment.

[belian78]

Man, if I lived in some of y'all's world growin up, I'da been shot dead many times over.

[Dr.3D]

I'm amazed at how people here think it's ok to walk up to someone walking down the street and give them the gestapo treatment.

The line is usually drawn at physical violence.

[kahless]

He wasn't 'creeping around windows', he was walking home. He wasn't bothering anyone and as such, he's protected under the 4th amendment to not be stopped by douchebags treating him like a criminal when he's not doing anything wrong.

I did not say he was, that is taken out of context.

According to wikipedia Zimmerman said the guy was walking behind the town homes instead of on the street or the sidewalk in a neighborhood that had break-ins.

Nothing wrong with simply having a conversation. I never said anything about searching him or holding him for questioning.

[belian78]

The line is usually drawn at physical violence.
Would that physical violence even have taken place had Zimmerman not chased down Martin and tried to be the hero? No, it wouldn't have. Martin would have been back home watching the second half of that basketball game.

[Dr.3D]

Would that physical violence even have taken place had Zimmerman not chased down Martin and tried to be the hero? No, it wouldn't have. Martin would have been back home watching the second half of that basketball game.

Makes no difference what excuse the one being violent wishes to use, they were wrong when they drew first blood.

[rpfocus]

Martin was an active football player, while Zimmerman was a doughy & out of shape dwarf. I suspect the muscle mass comparison was heavily skewed into Trayvon's direction, due to his youth and body type. If anyone ran into George Zimmerman in a dark alleyway, they would probably giggle.

5'9" is a dwarf now? I know I wouldn't be giggling if a 5'9" "dwarf" with a concealed handgun came to interrogate me on a rainy night for walking down the street. Looks like we need to give kids CCW licences now to even the playing field.

[Dr.3D]

5'9" is a dwarf now? I know I wouldn't be giggling if a 5'9" "dwarf" with a concealed handgun came to interrogate me on a rainy night for walking down the street. Looks like we need to give kids CCW licences now to even the playing field.

Na, just don't physically assault the "dwarf" and he wouldn't have an excuse to shoot you.

[matt0611]

Would that physical violence even have taken place had Zimmerman not chased down Martin and tried to be the hero? No, it wouldn't have. Martin would have been back home watching the second half of that basketball game.

Who cares if it wouldn't have?

Its not illegal to simply follow someone in a public place who you think is suspicious. Or even talk to them and ask questions.

And if Trayvon never left the house that night this wouldn't have happened either. So???

[RonPaulMall]

If someone is walking around under the over hang of my house or my neighbors house and I ask them "do you live here?" That is not aggression.

I applaud any of my neighborhoods if they do the same for me.

I have been questioned by neighbors in the middle of night walk that were new to the area and did not know who I was. I did not attack them or start to throw punches. We had a normal conversation.

Yeah, this is the real issue with what happened. A normal person isn't going to go crazy and attack a neighbor just because they are asking who they are or what they are up to. They'd probably just shrug it off. Maybe they'd get peeved if they thought it was unreasonable. If they were really peeved maybe they'd make a mental note and not invite the guy to the next bar-b-que. But under no circumstances would they punch the person in the face. Trayvon's problem is that the "thug" culture he grew up in led him to treat what was at most annoying behavior as some kind of assault on his manhood. He felt "dissed" and his culture teaches him that "disses" must be met with violence. A lot of times that wouldn't be a fatal character flaw. But this time he messed with the wrong guy, and he's dead as a result.

[rpfocus]

Na, just don't physically assault the "dwarf" and he wouldn't have an excuse to shoot you.

Oh trust me, I'd be the one facing murder charges if Zimmerman had tried that with me. Then again, I'm not a kid and have a CCW permit. If I'm walking down the street minding my own business, it would be a... mistake... to interrogate me.

[RonPaulMall]

He wasn't 'creeping around windows', he was walking home. He wasn't bothering anyone and as such, he's protected under the 4th amendment to not be stopped by douchebags treating him like a criminal when he's not doing anything wrong.

The 4th Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It doesn't protect you from conversations with your neighbors.

[AuH20]

The 4th Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It doesn't protect you from conversations with your neighbors.

Very true. From the police report, it's not like Zimmerman physically pounced on Martin from out of the blue and then to proceeded to rifle though his belongings.

[matt0611]

Oh trust me, I'd be the one facing murder charges if Zimmerman had tried that with me. Then again, I'm not a kid and have a CCW permit. If I'm walking down the street minding my own business, it would be a... mistake... to interrogate me.

Yes, you definitely would be facing murder charges if you simply shot and killed someone for asking you questions in a public place.

[Dr.3D]

Oh trust me, I'd be the one facing murder charges if Zimmerman had tried that with me. Then again, I'm not a kid and have a CCW permit. If I'm walking down the street minding my own business, it would be a... mistake... to interrogate me.

Sounds like you have a propensity toward violence.