So, Trayvon Martin. (Updated 9/10: From the duh and oops departments)

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 43 NEXT
 

Scroll to the bottom for most recent updates!
Old stuff preserved for reference, some of it may be inaccurate now, some links may no longer work.

Update 6/1: CNN reports Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. has revoked Zim's bond and ordered him to return to Florida within 48 hours.

Lester accused Zimmerman of having misrepresented how much money he had when his bond was originally set in April.

Update 6/12: Shellie Zimmerman collared for perjury -- The Orlando Sentinel reports Zimmerman's wife was arrested for alleged perjury during the bond hearing, lying about the family's assets.

In an affidavit, prosecutors revealed new details about Shellie Zimmerman's alleged efforts to hide money from the court.

Four days before she testified to having no knowledge of the funds, the affidavit says, Shellie Zimmerman began a series of transfers into her account - totaling $74,000 from April 16 to April 19.

Bail for Mrs. Zimmerman was set at $1,000, which she quickly posted.

Broader overview also available on the CS Monitor.

Of course, this'll have no effect on the actual trial of George Zimmerman.
...except maybe to color the perceptions of a juror or two.

Update 7/19: in addition to some other junk, Zim has done an interview with Fox's Sean Hannity. See it here or search Fox's site if the youtube vid gets killed.

Update 9/10: From the we-already-figured-this-out department: Judge likely towill deny Stand Your Ground claim, proceed with full trial. In a previous case, Judge Debra S. Nelson rejected a Stand Your Ground claim at a pre-trial hearing, therefore will likely do the same with this case, says LA Times, Orlando Sentinel.

I don't think anyone expected it to be thrown out pre-trial on SYG basis. But hey, it's an update.

Here's something more interesting that I missed from back in August (y'know, when the trial date was supposed to be set). Just a little something extra from the oops department: Trial not likely until early next year.

The Zimmerman case was scheduled on Wednesday for a docket sounding, a pro forma court procedure in which the court is given an update on the progress in the proceedings. However, Judge Kenneth R. Lester on Tuesday granted a defense request to continue the matter -- that is, push the docket sounding back -- until Oct. 3.

This video is relevant;


If you can stand it, listen to the audio 1:57+...

well the florida law is flawed (WTF florida so many dumb laws) and needs an obvious fix, castle doctrine is one thing, but this is stupid. Zimmerman should still be arrested for disobeying an officer of the law and its obvious he started the conflict.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/castle-doctrine-author-trayvon-s-killing-was-not-self-defense.html

Self-defense is out the window when he guy chased him with a car and a gun. Ignoring 911 telling him not to.

Yeah, heard a thing or two about it, including the telephone calls.

evilneko:
Self-defense I think should be a hard sell considering Zimmerman had a gun and 100 pounds on Martin.

And even with "stand your ground", doesn't him following and confronting Martin kind of go against that?

Plus, why would the claim for self-defense prevent arrest? Wouldn't they at least bring him in, check for drugs or alcohol and figure out whether the claim is valid? I mean, a person has died and you are letting the self-admitted shooter go because he said it was self-defense? What?

By the way, some are trying to downplay the possible racial angle, but there are people saying that he referred to Martin as one of the "fucking coons". I honestly find it difficult to make out, since he's saying it kind of under his breath (2:22).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV1x9nYP_6Y

EDIT: Oh, wow, Danyal, hadn't heard that clip before.

Zef Otter:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/castle-doctrine-author-trayvon-s-killing-was-not-self-defense.html

Self-defense is out the window when he guy chased him with a car and a gun. Ignoring 911 telling him not to.

That's pretty much my take too. Surely the fact that he actively got out of his car with a gun is legally an aggressive act?

Skeleon:
Yeah, heard a thing or two about it, including the telephone calls.

evilneko:
Self-defense I think should be a hard sell considering Zimmerman had a gun and 100 pounds on Martin.

And even with "stand your ground", doesn't him following and confronting Martin kind of go against that?

Plus, why would the claim for self-defense prevent arrest? Wouldn't they at least bring him in, check for drugs or alcohol and figure out whether the claim is valid? I mean, a person has died and you are letting the self-admitted shooter go because he said it was self-defense? What?

By the way, some are trying to downplay the possible racial angle, but there are people saying that he referred to Martin as one of the "fucking coons". I honestly find it difficult to make out, since he's saying it kind of under his breath (2:22).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV1x9nYP_6Y

EDIT: Oh, wow, Danyal, hadn't heard that clip before.

I agree, Rep. Dennis Baxley (who wrote the castle Doctrine) Said that Zimmerman is not protected under the law.

Skeleon:
Yeah, heard a thing or two about it, including the telephone calls.

evilneko:
Self-defense I think should be a hard sell considering Zimmerman had a gun and 100 pounds on Martin.

And even with "stand your ground", doesn't him following and confronting Martin kind of go against that?

Plus, why would the claim for self-defense prevent arrest? Wouldn't they at least bring him in, check for drugs or alcohol and figure out whether the claim is valid? I mean, a person has died and you are letting the self-admitted shooter go because he said it was self-defense? What?

By the way, some are trying to downplay the possible racial angle, but there are people saying that he referred to Martin as one of the "fucking coons". I honestly find it difficult to make out, since he's saying it kind of under his breath (2:22).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV1x9nYP_6Y

EDIT: Oh, wow, Danyal, hadn't heard that clip before.

the problem is we dont know who confronted who (most likely zimmer but we gotta go by a legal perspective) but i still think they should make a case out of the fact that he left his car when told not to.

Skeleon:

And even with "stand your ground", doesn't him following and confronting Martin kind of go against that?

Yeah, the Fox opinion piece I linked has the creator of the law saying the law doesn't allow someone to pursue.

I kinda deliberately left out the race issue, I didn't want to color anyone's perceptions right off the bat. Maybe I should've mentioned it at the end.

As far as I'm concerned even if they were the same race, it should be the same: Zimmerman's in a precarious position and most likely guilty of cold-blooded murder. Race does play a part in it though: the Feds are looking into bringing a hate crime case against him.

Hell if anything Martin's the one who should be claiming self-defense...were he able to.

OneCatch :

Zef Otter:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/castle-doctrine-author-trayvon-s-killing-was-not-self-defense.html

Self-defense is out the window when he guy chased him with a car and a gun. Ignoring 911 telling him not to.

That's pretty much my take too. Surely the fact that he actively got out of his car with a gun is legally an aggressive act?

Yeah. I key in on that too. Even without the girlfriend's phone call, Zimmerman's getting out of his car should've nullified his claim of self defense.

The problem is too many conflicting statements floating around from the press. More importantly unless it can be demonstrated that Zimmerman threw the first punch, or that he had the upper hand in the fight when he shot Martin, he cannot be charged with any form of murder. Given Zimmerman's injuries either he was hit in the back of the head with a blunt object(what some news sources are saying) which lends credence to the idea he was attacked first and therefore any charges will have to prove Zimmerman felt no threat, or he was on the ground getting punched in the face hard enough to cause bleeding on the back of his scalp(what other news sources are saying) and that is a very life threatening position to be in if you know anything about head injuries. In which case he was perfectly justified in shooting Martin so long as he did not throw the first punch or grab Martin.

The issue is, unless someone saw the START of the fight, it's Zimmerman's word only, which means unless he's caught in a blatant lie about who started the fight means that any murder charges must find him innocent.

Oh, the NRA apologists will find some way to defend this, somehow or other... Stuff like this happens dozens of times a year and you won't hear about it.

keiskay:
well the florida law is flawed (WTF florida so many dumb laws) and needs an obvious fix, castle doctrine is one thing, but this is stupid. Zimmerman should still be arrested for disobeying an officer of the law and its obvious he started the conflict.

911 operators are not law enforcement officers. Not to mention LEOs have no authority over the phone.

Blablahb:
Oh, the NRA apologists will find some way to defend this, somehow or other... Stuff like this happens dozens of times a year and you won't hear about it.

[citation needed] I do love how you manage to come up wit hthe most fanciful constructions of thought.

evilneko:

Skeleon:

And even with "stand your ground", doesn't him following and confronting Martin kind of go against that?

Yeah, the Fox opinion piece I linked has the creator of the law saying the law doesn't allow someone to pursue.

I kinda deliberately left out the race issue, I didn't want to color anyone's perceptions right off the bat. Maybe I should've mentioned it at the end.

As far as I'm concerned even if they were the same race, it should be the same: Zimmerman's in a precarious position and most likely guilty of cold-blooded murder. Race does play a part in it though: the Feds are looking into bringing a hate crime case against him.

Hell if anything Martin's the one who should be claiming self-defense...were he able to.

OneCatch :

Zef Otter:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/castle-doctrine-author-trayvon-s-killing-was-not-self-defense.html

Self-defense is out the window when he guy chased him with a car and a gun. Ignoring 911 telling him not to.

That's pretty much my take too. Surely the fact that he actively got out of his car with a gun is legally an aggressive act?

Yeah. I key in on that too. Even without the girlfriend's phone call, Zimmerman's getting out of his car should've nullified his claim of self defense.

I mean, it sounds like even giving Zimmerman ever possible benefit of the doubt, he was still the instigator of the situation.
Frankly, even if he didn't throw the first punch, he still put Martin in a situation in which a reasonable person would feel threatened, and then shot him when he reacted. That has to make Zimmerman culpable.
I mean christ, you know that something's indefensible when Fox are on the left of it politically!

If he got out of his car with a weapon and pursued him then the only person with a possible self defense and/or stand your ground argument is Trayvon. For this reason, even if Trayvon attacked him first, he probably had a right. He was being followed by a armed individual. So Zimmerman has no out here or at least he shouldn't but he'll probably get off.

Swyftstar:
If he got out of his car with a weapon and pursued him then the only person with a possible self defense and/or stand your ground argument is Trayvon. For this reason, even if Trayvon attacked him first, he probably had a right. He was being followed by a armed individual. So Zimmerman has no out here or at least he shouldn't but he'll probably get off.

You're assuming he knew the individual was armed, which given the time and light conditions was unlikely. That even assumes Zimmerman was OCing and not CCing.

Blablahb:
Oh, the NRA apologists will find some way to defend this, somehow or other... Stuff like this happens dozens of times a year and you won't hear about it.

I'm going to have to agree. Citation needed, por favor. If stuff like this happened "dozens" of times a year, the CSGV would be all over it, going more insane over their twitter account. As it stands, Ladd has gone further than is normal. So I doubt your claim that "stuff like this happens dozens of times a year".

Anyways, if he is guilty, I hope he fries. However, I'm not a believer in trial-by-public-opinion, and mob justice isn't really a good thing.

ravenshrike:
You're assuming he knew the individual was armed, which given the time and light conditions was unlikely. That even assumes Zimmerman was OCing and not CCing.

So, if you were pursued by a stranger in a car when walking home, alone at night, you're trying to tell me that you wouldn't feel threatened? Come on, that doesn't fly.

Skeleon:

Plus, why would the claim for self-defense prevent arrest? Wouldn't they at least bring him in, check for drugs or alcohol and figure out whether the claim is valid? I mean, a person has died and you are letting the self-admitted shooter go because he said it was self-defense? What?

This is what really got people up in arms about the case. The police completely shrugged the case off even though there should have been a proper investigation. This is also where the bigger accusations of racism are being thrown around. The police department in the area has a bad reputation so it is easy to believe that the failure by the police to investigate was racially motivated.

ravenshrike:

Swyftstar:
If he got out of his car with a weapon and pursued him then the only person with a possible self defense and/or stand your ground argument is Trayvon. For this reason, even if Trayvon attacked him first, he probably had a right. He was being followed by a armed individual. So Zimmerman has no out here or at least he shouldn't but he'll probably get off.

You're assuming he knew the individual was armed, which given the time and light conditions was unlikely. That even assumes Zimmerman was OCing and not CCing.

Zimmerman has a concealed weapons permit, so it is highly likely he was indeed carrying it concealed.

ravenshrike:
[citation needed] I do love how you manage to come up wit hthe most fanciful constructions of thought.

I didn't need to look. Here in the next quoted fragment, someone actually tried to argue that being told to not go after someone with a weapon, with the intention of committing murder, is null and void, thus clearly defending the murder;

ravenshrike:
911 operators are not law enforcement officers. Not to mention LEOs have no authority over the phone.

Here, someone actually questions if a guy who goes after a child, chases him down and then murders him, actually committed a crime. What other train of thought than wanting to defend any and all firearms violence would lead to such an unlikely interpretation?

CM156:
Anyways, if he is guilty, I hope he fries.

As for others...
Ramarley Graham was murdered by paranoid police officers inside his own home for the horrible crime of running to the toilet.

Antwain white, a mere child, hit an off duty officer with a light wooden cane in an attempt to intimidate him into giving his purse. This clearly warranted cold blooded murder by shooting the minor in the face.

Michael Gilyard was shot in the back by a police officer under unclear circumstances for the horrible crime of getting into a struggle, which clearly mandated summary execution.

Brandon Ray Brown was shot dead after walking towards an officer with a light walking cane with which one cannot inflict any real injures, over his head in a pose that is about the easiest possible to disarm. Give me a beast of a person attacking me like that, and I'll need less than three seconds to disarm them and put them out of action without causing any injuries. The officer on the scene guessed murder was a much easier alternative though.

Bruce Jasmen was murdered as he was burgling a home. Stealing clearly warrants cold blooded murder.

Ariston Waiters was murdered by police officers who tried to arrest him for not being involved in a fight between teenage girls. How a fight between two teenage girls can bring out a description of a man is a mystery to me, but as Waiters fled, fearing for his life, again his fears were proven correct as he was summarily executed.

Michael Nida was murdered as he tried to flee from police, fearing for his life as the paranoid officers came after him. Nida had committed no crime. His fears for his life and flight were justified though, because he was executed on the spot.

Jason Bitz was murdered by a police officer after opening a van with a screwdriver because the locks were jammed. It was no theft, Bitz had permission to use the van by it's owner. When he fled in fear of his life, the officer executed him on the spot.

Kollin Elders was executed for the 'crime' of arguing with an off duty police officer, by shooting him dead in front of a crowd in a restaurant.

Justin Crowley-Smilek was shot dead for walking towards an officer. He had before called for help for something which wasn't released. Instead of help, he got bullets.

That's just 2012 and second half of 2011, only police shootings. The rest is actually so much work I'd have to spend hours researching it. And since you're already determined to defend these murders, there's no real point in continuing any further.

evilneko:

ravenshrike:

Swyftstar:
If he got out of his car with a weapon and pursued him then the only person with a possible self defense and/or stand your ground argument is Trayvon. For this reason, even if Trayvon attacked him first, he probably had a right. He was being followed by a armed individual. So Zimmerman has no out here or at least he shouldn't but he'll probably get off.

You're assuming he knew the individual was armed, which given the time and light conditions was unlikely. That even assumes Zimmerman was OCing and not CCing.

Zimmerman has a concealed weapons permit, so it is highly likely he was indeed carrying it concealed.

Concealed or not He cannot say it was Self defense since witnesses said the boy was screaming for help which was silence with the gunshots.

Blablahb:

ravenshrike:
[citation needed] I do love how you manage to come up wit hthe most fanciful constructions of thought.

I didn't need to look. Here in the next quoted fragment, someone actually tried to argue that being told to not go after someone with a weapon, with the intention of committing murder, is null and void, thus clearly defending the murder;

ravenshrike:
911 operators are not law enforcement officers. Not to mention LEOs have no authority over the phone.

Here, someone actually questions if a guy who goes after a child, chases him down and then murders him, actually committed a crime. What other train of thought than wanting to defend any and all firearms violence would lead to such an unlikely interpretation?

CM156:
Anyways, if he is guilty, I hope he fries.

As for others...
Ramarley Graham was murdered by paranoid police officers inside his own home for the horrible crime of running to the toilet.

Antwain white, a mere child, hit an off duty officer with a light wooden cane in an attempt to intimidate him into giving his purse. This clearly warranted cold blooded murder by shooting the minor in the face.

Michael Gilyard was shot in the back by a police officer under unclear circumstances for the horrible crime of getting into a struggle, which clearly mandated summary execution.

Brandon Ray Brown was shot dead after walking towards an officer with a light walking cane with which one cannot inflict any real injures, over his head in a pose that is about the easiest possible to disarm. Give me a beast of a person attacking me like that, and I'll need less than three seconds to disarm them and put them out of action without causing any injuries. The officer on the scene guessed murder was a much easier alternative though.

Bruce Jasmen was murdered as he was burgling a home. Stealing clearly warrants cold blooded murder.

Ariston Waiters was murdered by police officers who tried to arrest him for not being involved in a fight between teenage girls. How a fight between two teenage girls can bring out a description of a man is a mystery to me, but as Waiters fled, fearing for his life, again his fears were proven correct as he was summarily executed.

Michael Nida was murdered as he tried to flee from police, fearing for his life as the paranoid officers came after him. Nida had committed no crime. His fears for his life and flight were justified though, because he was executed on the spot.

Jason Bitz was murdered by a police officer after opening a van with a screwdriver because the locks were jammed. It was no theft, Bitz had permission to use the van by it's owner. When he fled in fear of his life, the officer executed him on the spot.

Kollin Elders was executed for the 'crime' of arguing with an off duty police officer, by shooting him dead in front of a crowd in a restaurant.

Justin Crowley-Smilek was shot dead for walking towards an officer. He had before called for help for something which wasn't released. Instead of help, he got bullets.

That's just 2012 and second half of 2011, only police shootings. The rest is actually so much work I'd have to spend hours researching it. And since you're already determined to defend these murders, there's no real point in continuing any further.

Hang on a sec there, skippy. Since when did I say I was defending those actions? But if you expect me to, I shall.

Also, in the case of Bruce Jasmen: Shooting an intruder is not the logical or ethical equal of cold blooded murder. I've asked you to prove this before. You have not. Also, you said that an 18 year old woman should just let intruders run through her house, rather than shooting them. As if it's more moral to be a victim.

Oh, and look at this

http://www.dnainfo.com/20120130/williamsburg-greenpoint-bushwick/off-duty-detective-shoots-man-bushwick

White allegedly struck the detective with a cane on his face while the other suspect allegedly grabbed the detective's arm and pretended he had a gun, according to NYPD officials.
Police said the detective ordered White to stop and displayed his shield and identified himself as an officer. The teen, however, did not stop, officials said, and the detective opened fire, shooting the alleged would-be mugger in once the chest.

So bullshit on that. He attacked an officer, who gave him a chance to stop. He didn't. He's 17, by the way. So calling him a "mere child" is... simply not true. I suppose calling him a "teenager" wouldn't have helped you as much.

Also, a few more sources
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/09/ramarley-graham-new-york-police-_n_1266715.html

While I think shooting him went too far, he wasn't as innocent as you claimed

For Michael Gilyard, http://www.ktbs.com/news/Mother-Speaks-Out-About-Officer-Involved-Shooting-Of-Son/-/144844/9163224/-/m4pvjvz/-/index.html

Again, you're either lying or trying to paint the facts as you see them. I'm going to say that considering how you consistently misrepresent these stories, you're flat out lying at this point.

For Brandon Ray Brown

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015590013_deputyshooting13m.html

Bullshit again. They tried tazing him, but it didn't work. And the officer was on the ground. If it's "be smashed with a cane by someone who can take two tasers" or "Shoot him", I'm going to take "shoot him" every time.

Ariston Waiters.. This is one case I'll accept as an LEO going too far.

Michael Nida. While I think running from cops is about the stupidest thing you can do, I agree here that LEOs overacted. So that's two so far

Jason Bitz.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/27/local/la-me-bitz-20111128

"I saw him coming from across the street, pointing his gun," Toth said. According to Toth, Bitz raised his voice back at the officer, said he wasn't breaking into any cars, told him to put the gun down and dared him to shoot him. Then he ran.

That's... that's just stupid. Again, though, while it wasn't as you put it, I'll give you this one.

Kollin Elders.

Overreaction. Four so far.

Justin Crowley-Smilek

You missed this bit

Although Crowley-Smilek was well-known to the Farmington police, the young officer did not realize he was walking into a dangerous situation when Rosie left the police station to talk with Crowley-Smilek.

Within seconds, Crowley-Smilek came at Rosie with a knife, and Rosie responded by shooting his assailant.

http://www.newmainetimes.org/articles/2011/11/23/beyond-yellow-ribbon-tragic-death-justin-crowley-smilek/

Soooooooo. Bullshit yet again. He could have tazed him. he made a split second decision that this wasn't a call for a tazer. And you know, I have to agree with him. You don't tazer people who are charging you with a knife. Because if it fails, your screwed.

Again, I don't appreciate being lied to. At all

So far, you've managed to show four incidents of LEOs overacting. Four. That's hardly dozens.

So again, I ask you: Can you prove your claim? Or will you ignore this, as you do so many times people confront you with your bullshit? My guess is on the latter.

I find it funny that in my travels over the internet, I have met two dutch security guards. Both of whom I haven't gotten along well with. Though it could be only one, if your name happens to be Aprion. Though I doubt it.

Anyways.

Toodles!

-Caleb

This certainly, on its surface, looks to me to be a vigilante with a history of suspicion of young black males aggressively pursued Martin and, after the confrontation got ugly, shot and killed him. The fact that he wasn't even arrested is a complete travesty.

Added a relevant video to the OP.

Captcha: face the music.

Yeah, someone needs to face the music here.

George Zimmerman believed he had the right to shoot Trayvon in self defense. Depending on the circumstances of the confrontation, that belief may have been unreasonable, and Zimmerman may be guilty of voluntary manslaughter. To convict him, it would have to be proven that Trayvon's actions didn't not give Zimmerman reason to fear for his safety, and that is impossible to prove because nobody saw anything that happened.

Regardless of the circumstances, a child lost his life, and I don't agree with people spinning that tragic event to push their own personal political agenda or to vent racial grievances.

cthulhuspawn82:
George Zimmerman believed he had the right to shoot Trayvon in self defense. Depending on the circumstances of the confrontation, that belief may have been unreasonable, and Zimmerman may be guilty of voluntary manslaughter. To convict him, it would have to be proven that Trayvon's actions didn't not give Zimmerman reason to fear for his safety, and that is impossible to prove because nobody saw anything that happened.

Regardless of the circumstances, a child lost his life, and I don't agree with people spinning that tragic event to push their own personal political agenda or to vent racial grievances.

Whether Zimmermann's actions were reasonable or not is not at issue here. That should be for a court to decide once this case is brought to trial.

The issue here is the police department's conduct in investigating the incident, which can at best be described as gross incompetence and at worst a coverup motivated by racial bias.

I don't see how this isn't a race issue. If he wasn't black, he'd not have been "suspicious" enough for the self-appointed neighbourhood watch to run after him with a gun, despite being told not to. I can't imagine they police would have jumped to the shooter's side if it was a white kid.

thaluikhain:
I don't see how this isn't a race issue. If he wasn't black, he'd not have been "suspicious" enough for the self-appointed neighborhood watch to run after him with a gun, despite being told not to. I can't imagine they police would have jumped to the shooter's side if it was a white kid.

Why do you believe that Zimmerman's suspicions, and the police reaction, were racially motivated? Is it based on your belief that white people are racists and bigots who think that all blacks are criminals?

Let me just make a couple of statements, and you tell me if either of them is racist.

"Trayvon must be at fault because he is a black guy and we know that black people are thieves and murderers."

"Zimmerman must be at fault because he is a white guy and we know that white people are racist and bigoted."

cthulhuspawn82:

thaluikhain:
I don't see how this isn't a race issue. If he wasn't black, he'd not have been "suspicious" enough for the self-appointed neighborhood watch to run after him with a gun, despite being told not to. I can't imagine they police would have jumped to the shooter's side if it was a white kid.

Why do you believe that Zimmerman's suspicions, and the police reaction, were racially motivated? Is it based on your belief that white people are racists and bigots who think that all blacks are criminals?

Let me just make a couple of statements, and you tell me if either of them is racist.

"Trayvon must be at fault because he is a black guy and we know that black people are thieves and murderers."

"Zimmerman must be at fault because he is a white guy and we know that white people are racist and bigoted."

Uhhhh, pretty sure Zimmerman is Hispanic.

I just hope this doesn't turn into a race riot. Because that's where I see this headed.

cthulhuspawn82:

thaluikhain:
I don't see how this isn't a race issue. If he wasn't black, he'd not have been "suspicious" enough for the self-appointed neighborhood watch to run after him with a gun, despite being told not to. I can't imagine they police would have jumped to the shooter's side if it was a white kid.

Why do you believe that Zimmerman's suspicions, and the police reaction, were racially motivated? Is it based on your belief that white people are racists and bigots who think that all blacks are criminals?

Let me just make a couple of statements, and you tell me if either of them is racist.

"Trayvon must be at fault because he is a black guy and we know that black people are thieves and murderers."

"Zimmerman must be at fault because he is a white guy and we know that white people are racist and bigoted."

Both of them are racist statements. However, Zimmerman is not white. He is mexican.

CM156:

Uhhhh, pretty sure Zimmerman is Hispanic.

I just hope this doesn't turn into a race riot. Because that's where I see this headed.

evilneko:

Both of them are racist statements. However, Zimmerman is not white. He is mexican.

I heard that he is half white and half Hispanic. I have seen his picture, and he "appears" Hispanic.

But all of that is unimportant. The reason I called to him as "white" is because people are playing the "Racist white guy suspects and shoots black guy for being black" angle here.

I am not saying he is innocent, or that he is not a racist. He may have suspected Trayvon because he was black, and he may not have had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger. But in order to convict him of a crime, those things would have to be proven, and given the complete lack of witnesses and mind-readers, I don't think that is possible.

Segment from CNN's Anderson Cooper with the two women who found Zimmerman and Martin in their backyard, after the shooting. According to them, Zimmerman was straddling Martin post-shooting, and they heard no struggle. They say the struggle occurred a few doors down from them.

Which could mean anything. It could that he was trying to help the kid somehow (giving him CPR, perhaps, or trying to compress the wound?)

Meanwhile, another witness saw someone "in a white shirt" (Martin was wearing a grey hoodie/sweater) straddling someone else (who she couldn't see). Zimmerman however, was wearing a red jacket. Guess that Zimmerman's 100-pound advantage didn't work out for him so well?

In one of the panicked calls by neighbors, a 30-year-old woman tells the dispatcher she heard a man screaming and saw a man with a white T-shirt on top of someone else. She couldn't tell the race of the person or see the person he was on top of.

The police report released by the city says Martin was wearing a gray sweater, blue jeans and white and red sneakers. Zimmerman, the police report said, was wearing a red jacket and blue jeans.

http://tucsoncitizen.com/usa-today-news/2012/03/22/fla-chief-in-trayvon-martin-case-steps-aside/

And Zimmerman apparently had water and grass on his back in addition to the wounds on his head. All of this supports his story: so what exactly does all of the evidence added up prove? Absolutely nothing. If prosecutors took this case to court based solely on what's been released, they'd get torn apart.

I refuse to jump to conclusions about Zimmerman's guilt or innocence. While he definitely should not have followed Martin (he was a moron for breaking Watch guidelines and ignoring the advice of the dispatcher) calling him a murderer on that alone is presumptuous. Calling it a hate crime is jumping the gun even further given that the only evidence of that is a fuzzy voice in a phone call (CNN analyzed it and couldn't come up with a "consensus" on the matter: aka they either legitimately have no consensus, or they don't want to deny the presence of a slur because they don't want to appear racist. I haven't heard the call myself, so if there's a link out there I'd like to hear it.)

Police should have checked Zimmerman for drugs/alcohol, even if he didn't appear to be under the influence. Watch members should be told more clearly not to go after suspicious people, even if they feel obligated to do so, they should leave matters to the police.

If the police have evidence that Zimmerman committed murder, they'll bring it before the grand jury and we'll see it.

Inb4 waiting for more evidence to come out before deciding what happened makes me some sort of racist, violence-loving NRA apologist.

thaluikhain:

cthulhuspawn82:

thaluikhain:
I don't see how this isn't a race issue. If he wasn't black, he'd not have been "suspicious" enough for the self-appointed neighborhood watch to run after him with a gun, despite being told not to. I can't imagine they police would have jumped to the shooter's side if it was a white kid.

Why do you believe that Zimmerman's suspicions, and the police reaction, were racially motivated? Is it based on your belief that white people are racists and bigots who think that all blacks are criminals?

Fuck off. If something happens again and again and again, we tend to call that a pattern.

By that logic, if there is a pattern of some black people committing gang crimes, suspecting black people will commit gang crimes is totally justified. Also Hispanics should be suspected of hopping the border, Irishmen should be suspected of being drunks, etc.

That line of argument is bullcrap no matter who you use it on. Saying that there is a "pattern" is an attempt to justify the presumption of guilt via mild racism. The fact that it's against a "white guy" does not magically make that untrue.

By the by, Zimmerman, as has been noted multiple times, is Hispanic, even if he was mistaken for a white guy by the officer filing the report. Does this mean that the police automatically side with Hispanics over black people?

(His picture on CNN makes him look Hispanic to me, no idea why the officer put "white" in his report. I guess from what people are saying it was night, maybe that's why.)

I think many people feel Zimmerman was racially motivated because he had a history of calling 911 because of suspicious-looking black people in his neighborhood, and because he supposedly used a racial slur during his 911 call.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 43 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked