Innocent teen shoot and killed;police do nothing

[keck553]

The 'kid' was beating the shooters head into the concrete when he was shot... poor innocent thing...

Bless his heart.

That's hardly justification for self defense, don't you know?

[keck553]

Can you please provide a link to this?


Someone somewhere on the right/conservative side had to knowingly alter/photoshop pics of Trayvon and use pics of other boys while claiming them to be Trayvon... how's that any different than someone somewhere on the left knowingly altering the 911 audio?

CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS. Have at it.

And no, the photo was not alterened, it was the wrong guy. Please be accurate.

[Brother Mark]

If a guy was following you, and he got close and seemed aggressive, what would you do? If a fight breaks out, and you realized he had a gun, how hard would you pound his head into the concrete if you could not get to the gun to disarm him?

This case is not so cut and dried for either side, IMO.

[keck553]

If a guy was following you, and he got close and seemed aggressive, what would you do? If a fight breaks out, and you realized he had a gun, how hard would you pound his head into the concrete if you could not get to the gun to disarm him?

This case is not so cut and dried for either side, IMO.

That's not what happened, nor is the sequence of events as you depict here, nor do you know when / if Trayvon became aware that George was carrying a concealed weapon. At any rate, a holstered weapon is not consideered a threat that rises to the level of deploying deadly force (bashing someone's head on concrete).

Your suggestion would fall apart in a court of law in about 10 seconds.

[Brother Mark]

That's not what happened, nor is the sequence of events as you depict here, nor do you know when / if Trayvon became aware that George was carrying a concealed weapon. At any rate, a holstered weapon is not consideered a threat that rises to the level of deploying deadly force (bashing someone's head on concrete).

Your suggestion would fall apart in a court of law in about 10 seconds.

We don't know what happened Keck. That was my point. Things we do know.

1. He was being followed
2. He became aware that the guy that had followed him had a gun. When? We don't know. But it has been testified that he actually tried to take the gun away.
3. He apparently was in a fight.

Zimmerman used bad sense to follow the guy especially after being told not to.

In a court of law, they could try to tear apart what I wrote. But it wouldn't be necessary for me to prove it. Just plant a seed of doubt in the jury's mind that he might have been acting in self defense. By default, it would look bad for the other guy.

This is NOT a slam dunk case for Zimmerman. Having said that, the left is going nutso on this one.

[keck553]

We don't know what happened Keck. That was my point. Things we do know.

1. He was being followed
2. He became aware that the guy that had followed him had a gun. When? We don't know. But it has been testified that he actually tried to take the gun away.
3. He apparently was in a fight.

Zimmerman used bad sense to follow the guy especially after being told not to.

In a court of law, they could try to tear apart what I wrote. But it wouldn't be necessary for me to prove it. Just plant a seed of doubt in the jury's mind that he might have been acting in self defense. By default, it would look bad for the other guy.

This is NOT a slam dunk case for Zimmerman. Having said that, the left is going nutso on this one.

No one here has said it was a "slam dunk case." However you missed the part where Zimmerman disengaged (or lost him) and Trayvon followed Zimmerman, broke his nose and used his head as a jackhammer for the sidewalk. Had Trayvon been successful, he would have been guilty of manslaughter at a minimum. Would you follow and start a fight with someone you knew was armed? If yes, then the intent is obvious. If no, then the intent is still obvious. Being followed by a night watchman is not justification for this kind of response. Had Trayvon not responded in this way there would have ended peacefully.

By the way there is no law that states Zimmerman needs to follow the advise of an untrained and unqualified 911 operator. Moot point. If it was a bad choice for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon, then it was a really bad choice for Trayvon to follow Zimmerman. But Trayvon gets a pass for that. Why? Because he lost the fight? Or because sensationalism sells?

Remember the adultress they dragged before Jesus? Same sense of "the need for justice" prevailed there as those who demand Zimmerman's head on a pike, IMO. But, just as in the 1st century, we have laws that call for due process that must take place before we condemn the accused.

[Brother Mark]

No one here has said it was a "slam dunk case." However you missed the part where Zimmerman disengaged (or lost him) and Trayvon followed Zimmerman, broke his nose and used his head as a jackhammer for the sidewalk.

No. I heard that. But it doesn't make it so. That's my point.

Had Trayvon been successful, he would have been guilty of manslaughter at a minimum.

Then you think Zimmerman is guilty too? I mean, he followed. How do you know he didn't engage first?

Would you follow and start a fight with someone you knew was armed? If yes, then the intent is obvious.

Zimmerman followed him. Does that make his intent obvious?

If no, then the intent is still obvious. Being followed by a night watchman is not justification for this kind of response. Had Trayvon not responded in this way there would have ended peacefully.

How was Trayvon to know he was a night watchman and not some hoodlum?

By the way there is no law that states Zimmerman needs to follow the advise of an untrained and unqualified 911 operator. Moot point.

Not against the law, but not a moot point either. It shows a serious case of carelessness.

If it was a bad choice for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon, then it was a really bad choice for Trayvon to follow Zimmerman.

If he did, then yea, bad choice there too.

But Trayvon gets a pass for that. Why?

Because it hasn't been established that it went down that way.

Because he lost the fight? Or because sensationalism sells?

Zimmerman needs to be examined for what he did. He shot an unarmed man that was minding his own business, who would have continued to mind his own business had Zimmerman left him alone, and who would still be alive had Zimmerman left him alone and who was law abiding at the time. In short, Trayvon should still be alive and had Zimmerman acted cautiously and with wisdom, he would be.

Now the facts of the case so far are fuzzy, but a jury should be checking into IMO. Once the facts are established beyond a reasonable doubt, we should know more. Just because Zimmerman says it went down one way, doesn't make it so.

Remember the adultress they dragged before Jesus? Same sense of "the need for justice" prevailed there as those who demand Zimmerman's head on a pike, IMO. But, just as in the 1st century, we have laws that call for due process that must take place before we condemn the accused.

Due process is called for in this case. I've only seen one person in this thread come across as not wanting due process (and I don't mean you).

[diffangle]

The 'kid' was beating the shooters head into the concrete when he was shot... poor innocent thing...

Bless his heart.

He was a kid, a kid who was doing nothing wrong by walking down a sidewalk, a kid who weighed 80 - 100 pounds less than his killer. If Trayvon was the hulk you guys make him out to be then why weren't Zimm's injuries bad enough to seek medical attention that night?

CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS. Have at it.

And no, the photo was not alterened, it was the wrong guy. Please be accurate.

If you would completely read my post you would see that I mentioned the picture of the wrong guy, but there were also photos of him put out that were altered too... so no need to be rude by saying things like "please be accurate".

However you missed the part where Zimmerman disengaged (or lost him) and Trayvon followed Zimmerman, broke his nose and used his head as a jackhammer for the sidewalk.

According to Zimm he lost him, doesn't make it so just cause Zimm says so. If Zimm really didn't pursue Trayvon any further after hanging up with 911, then why on the 911 call after he was told to not follow him, the 911 operator asks him where the officers can find him when they arrive, he proceeds to tell them to meet him as his vehicle, explains where it's at, then stops after he explains where his vehicle is and say's, "uh can you just have them call me when they get here so I can tell them where I'll be"? He apparently decided not to go back to his vehicle at that point and had decided to pursue Trayvon instead not knowing where he'd end up by the time the police arrived.

[Amos_with_goats]

He was a kid, a kid who was doing nothing wrong by walking down a sidewalk, a kid who weighed 80 - 100 pounds less than his killer. If Trayvon was the hulk you guys make him out to be then why weren't Zimm's injuries bad enough to seek medical attention that night?....

"doing nothing wrong' = bashing head on sidewalk? I understand that you object to the actions that were taken that lead to this, but it strikes me as unrealistic to make Trayvon out as 'innocent'... he was assaulting a man at the time he was shot...

[Brother Mark]

"doing nothing wrong' = bashing head on sidewalk? I understand that you object to the actions that were taken that lead to this, but it strikes me as unrealistic to make Trayvon out as 'innocent'... he was assaulting a man at the time he was shot...

Depends on why he was "assaulting" him. According to some stories, he actually went for Zimmerman's gun. If so, then he knew he had a gun. If I knew someone had a gun and I was fighting with them, I would pound the guys head in the concrete as hard as I could. Wouldn't you?

We don't know how this thing started. That said, the left is WAY overdoing this thing. They are lying and then coming clean only when they have to. It's horrible reporting.

[Reynolds357]

If a guy was following you, and he got close and seemed aggressive, what would you do? If a fight breaks out, and you realized he had a gun, how hard would you pound his head into the concrete if you could not get to the gun to disarm him?

This case is not so cut and dried for either side, IMO.

Exactly.
We do not know what happened. The proper authorities with all the available facts will make the right decision.
This entire thing got blown out of proportion when Jackson and Sharpton thought they had a white on black altercation that would make them some money.
I would have much more respect and empathy for Martin and respect for his family if the family were not openly courting the support of racists like the above mentioned two and the new black panther party.

[diffangle]

"doing nothing wrong' = bashing head on sidewalk? I understand that you object to the actions that were taken that lead to this, but it strikes me as unrealistic to make Trayvon out as 'innocent'... he was assaulting a man at the time he was shot...

What crime was Trayvon committing to warrant George to stalk him? As far as I can tell, walking down a sidewalk armed with Skittles isn't a crime.

According to Trayvon's girlfriend who was on the phone with him, George chased Trayvon down and was the one who shoved Trayvon first... how do know that wasn't the case? If that was the case, which would be fitting since Zimm was the one who chased/instigated the whole encounter and from past experience had been shown to be "too aggressive" according to an ex fellow employee, then what would be wrong with Trayvon hitting George back in self defense?

[Reynolds357]

What crime was Trayvon committing to warrant George to stalk him? As far as I can tell, walking down a sidewalk armed with Skittles isn't a crime.

According to Trayvon's girlfriend who was on the phone with him, George chased Trayvon down and was the one who shoved Trayvon first... how do know that wasn't the case? If that was the case, which would be fitting since Zimm was the one who chased/instigated the whole encounter and from past experience had been shown to be "too aggressive" according to an ex fellow employee, then what would be wrong with Trayvon hitting George in self defense?

Zimmerman was not "stalking." If you understood legal terms as they apply to code, you might better understand this case. You either lack understanding of legal terminology, or you intentionally misuse them as a form of propaganda.

[Brother Mark]

According to Zimm he lost him, doesn't make it so just cause Zimm says so.

You can't have that statement without it cutting both ways Diff. The same is true of Trayvon's girlfriend, the other eye witnesses, etc.

[diffangle]

Exactly.
We do not know what happened. The proper authorities with all the available facts will make the right decision.
This entire thing got blown out of proportion when Jackson and Sharpton thought they had a white on black altercation that would make them some money.
I would have much more respect and empathy for Martin and respect for his family if the family were not openly courting the support of racists like the above mentioned two and the new black panther party.

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-26/j...?_s=PM:JUSTICE

The separatist New Black Panther Party, described as a hate group by a civil rights organization, is standing by its $10,000 bounty offer for the capture of the man who shot Trayvon Martin, despite vehement opposition from, among others, Martin's family.

Martin family attorney Daryl Parks echoed comments by others associated with the family, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, condemning the apparent bounty offer. "We don't condone those people whatsoever," Parks said.

Speaking earlier Monday to city officials in a packed Sanford Civic Center, Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin, said his family wanted to work through the legal system and spur changes in Sanford's police department and Florida law.

"We're not asking for an eye for an eye," Tracy Martin said. "We're asking for justice, justice, justice."