George Zimmerman was acquitted last night of both second degree murder and manslaughter charges in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin on Feb 26, 2012. Background on the case, as well as a timeline of events leading up to the shooting, statements made by Zimmerman, witness accounts, and the initial police report may be found here, here and here.
In the sixteen months since Martin was killed, the case has become the centerpiece of debates over racial profiling, self-defense and equal justice in the United States. Saturday’s verdict, while bringing an end to the case of the State of Florida v. George M. Zimmerman, will not bring an end to those discussions. George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin, but under of Florida law and by decision of a jury of his peers, he did not murder Martin, he shot him in self-defense.
Florida’s self-defense statue (§776.013(3)) reads as follows:
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
Thus, the jury in this case could have found fault with Zimmerman for starting the altercation with Martin by getting out of his car and following Martin (which was legal to do in FL), yet still found him not guilty of second degree murder, or of the lesser charge of manslaughter, which in Florida is a killing that has no legal justification. Essentially, if the jurors believed that once a fight between Zimmerman and Martin began – regardless of who provoked it – if Zimmerman reasonably feared he would suffer grave bodily harm, then he reasonably acted in self-defense.
The 6 jurors who decided this case have thus far declined to speak to the media about whether this was in fact their reasoning, but under the law, their decision was sound. Both George Zimmerman and the Martin family received their day in court.
The Martin family, while expressing understandable disappointment in the outcome, has accepted the verdict. The family of the young man who was killed that night in February as he walked back to the home of his father’s fiance, which was in the same gated town home complex in which George Zimmerman lived, has all along advocated not violence, but justice and peace, and they have done so with remarkable dignity and grace in the face of a heartbreaking situation.
There have indeed been peaceful protests and calls for a federal civil rights prosecution, but no violent riots reminiscent of those following the acquittal of Los Angeles Police Department officers in the beating of Rodney King in 1992. In fact, an expectation of violence from the black community, when a review of American history will show that violent race riots have been used by white Americans against black Americans far more often than the opposite, shows an inherent racial bias by those who harbor that expectation and have even stoked the flames of it. Isolating a few statements by radical individuals on social media to build a case for racial “thuggery” is race-baiting and fear-mongering at its worst. In fact, it plays into the same elements of racial profiling and stereotypes that have underscored this case from the beginning.
White people are afraid of a black man in the dark, even when he’s not doing anything wrong. I will admit that I am one of those people. As was discussed ad nauseum in the recent Paula Deen situation, “Everyone’s a Little Bit Racist.” I am a white woman who will admit to being afraid of a black man in the dark, but I am not a person who would assume that a black teenager walking in my neighborhood after dark did not have a right to be there. I am not a person who would automatically think that he was a “fucking punk” or one of many “assholes” who “always gets away.” I would be afraid, but if he wasn’t bothering me, my fear would cause me to walk the other way. If there had been recent break-ins in my neighborhood, I may have called the police to report him. Under no circumstances would I have approached him. I am ashamed of my inherent fear of “the other,” but to deny it would be to lie about basic truths of human nature.
The problem, other than what is in our hearts, is when our laws are crafted in such a way that a man can legally pursue a teenager in the dark, a teenager who is minding his own business and is in a place that he has every right to be – six houses away from where he was staying for the week – and shoot him during an altercation, claiming self-defense. The problem is when our laws are crafted in such a way that anyone can start a fight and then claim self-defense. The problem is when our laws are crafted in such a way that the best way to ensure that you are not convicted of murder or manslaughter is to make sure that your opponent ends up not just bested, but dead. The problem is when a person’s inherent racial bias, which causes him to profile a young man in the dark, is known to be wrong but is guaranteed to be discounted because of the broad nature of certain laws.
It is time to change the laws.
Amy Lazenby is the associate opinion editor at FITSNews. She is a wife, mother of three and small business owner with her husband who splits her time between South Carolina and Georgia. Follow her on Twitter @Mrs_Laz or email her at amy@fitsnews.com.
***
437 comments
Reasonable article. Not inflammatory. Need more stuff like this.
Reasonable article. Not inflammatory. Need more stuff like this.
Amy I have wondered how you ended up on this site, but I’ll give the “founding editor” credit for spotting a wise writer. A civil trial on this matter will follow……I betcha.
Thank you, CS. A wrongful death suit – which is a civil case that carries no criminal penalties – brought by Mr. Martin’s mother against the Home Owner’s Association of the complex within which Mr. Martin was shot (and for which Mr. Zimmerman was a volunteer neighborhood watchman) was settled out of court in April. At that time, the family’s attorney, Benjamin Crump, stated that there were plans to file a wrongful death suit against Mr. Zimmerman himself. The possible Federal civil rights violation suit I mentioned above, which could be brought by the U.S. Dept. of Justice, would be a criminal case and would carry attending criminal penalties were Mr. Zimmerman found guilty. Thank you for reading.
ABL
The settlement was reported to have been $1.2 million.
Amy I have wondered how you ended up on this site, but I’ll give the “founding editor” credit for spotting a wise writer. A civil trial on this matter will follow……I betcha.
Thank you, CS. A wrongful death suit – which is a civil case that carries no criminal penalties – brought by Mr. Martin’s mother against the Home Owner’s Association of the complex within which Mr. Martin was shot (and for which Mr. Zimmerman was a volunteer neighborhood watchman) was settled out of court in April. At that time, the family’s attorney, Benjamin Crump, stated that there were plans to file a wrongful death suit against Mr. Zimmerman himself. The possible federal civil rights violation case I mentioned above, which could be brought by the U.S. Dept. of Justice, would be a criminal case and would carry attending criminal penalties were Mr. Zimmerman found guilty. Thank you for reading.
ABL
The settlement was reported to have been $1.2 million.
Well written, factual, concise argument – unusual for a liberal!
Well written, factual, concise argument – unusual for a liberal!
Well written and thought through article. It is a shame that you are just wrong. Thank God we have such laws, as we should not have to hide in fear in our own neighborhoods. The problem(s) here are with Trayvon Martin. If he was 6 houses from his place of residence, why did he not just go there and alert authorities. He initiated the final attack, not George Zimmerman. And as to his attire: if you dress like a thug you will be assumed to be a thug.
I think I would have handled it differently than Zimmerman, but he did nothing illegal, and the system should not be used to persecute him.
Roberto said: “Well written and thought through article”….
Roberto also said: “you are just wrong”….
Can’t be both Roberto. Don’t pander.
Actually, yes you can. You can have a well thought and written article which begins with error in fact, as this article did.
Still, I suspect pandering…
Not to mention: I’m a stickler for the truth, I guess. Silly me.
Don’t mind T, he’s just used to posting things that are both poorly thought out AND wrong.
You are no kind of stickler. As for me, on the other hand. . . .
How do you know that Martin initiated the attack? There were no eyewitnesses to the entire confrontation. There is no way to know that.
If one listens to the testimony, and the tapes of the 911 call, you can hear that Zimmerman lost contact with Martin. Martin was, at the time of the confrontation, only six houses from his own residence. Zimmerman was then attacked when Martin came back to confront.
George Zimmerman initiated the attack when he disregarded LE dispatch and got out of his vehicle.
Actually, he was already out of his vehicle when he called 911. And the 911 dispatcher, who is NOT a cop, said on the stand that he made a suggestion, and that he could not give an order, as that would have made him responsible for whatever went wrong. So, if he HAD given an order to get back in his vehicle, and Mr. Martin had done a crime, the dispatcher would have been held responsible. This was direct testimony. Also keep in mind that there was never any evidence that Mr. Martin was attacked by Zimmerman, quite the opposite has been true. The problem lies in the fact that the press altwered the 911 tapes, and very few people have gone to the trouble of listening to what actually went into testimony.
Quality wise, you may have just displaced BigT/GrandTango for the most idiotic comment ever on this blog. Quantity wise, you’ve still got a lot of work to do.
He was ALREADY out of his vehicle when he called 911. Go listen to the actual tape, not the one edited, but the one entered into evidence.
And just to clear things up: Martin initiated the attack when he attacked Zimmerman. Zimmerman never attacked except in the feeble minds of liberals who ignore facts.
Well written and thought through article. It is a shame that you are just wrong. Thank God we have such laws, as we should not have to hide in fear in our own neighborhoods. The problem(s) here are with Trayvon Martin. If he was 6 houses from his place of residence, why did he not just go there and alert authorities. He initiated the final attack, not George Zimmerman. And as to his attire: if you dress like a thug you will be assumed to be a thug.
I think I would have handled it differently than Zimmerman, but he did nothing illegal, and the system should not be used to persecute him.
How do you know that Martin initiated the attack? There were no eyewitnesses to the entire confrontation. There is no way to know that.
If one listens to the testimony, and the tapes of the 911 call, you can hear that Zimmerman lost contact with Martin. Martin was, at the time of the confrontation, only six houses from his own residence. Zimmerman was then attacked when Martin came back to confront.
George Zimmerman initiated the attack when he disregarded LE dispatch and got out of his vehicle.
Actually, he was already out of his vehicle when he called 911. And the 911 dispatcher, who is NOT a cop, said on the stand that he made a suggestion, and that he could not give an order, as that would have made him responsible for whatever went wrong. So, if he HAD given an order to get back in his vehicle, and Mr. Martin had done a crime, the dispatcher would have been held responsible. This was direct testimony. Also keep in mind that there was never any evidence that Mr. Martin was attacked by Zimmerman, quite the opposite has been true. The problem lies in the fact that the press altwered the 911 tapes, and very few people have gone to the trouble of listening to what actually went into testimony.
Quality wise, you may have just displaced BigT/GrandTango for the most idiotic comment ever on this blog. Quantity wise, you’ve still got a lot of work to do.
He was ALREADY out of his vehicle when he called 911. Go listen to the actual tape, not the one edited, but the one entered into evidence.
And just to clear things up: Martin initiated the attack when he attacked Zimmerman. Zimmerman never attacked except in the feeble minds of liberals who ignore facts.
A White-Black Man (Trayvon looked like Obama’s son. Obama’s a White-Black Man) Jumping on an Hispanic-White man and brutally BEATING him is DOING SOMETHING WRONG. Brutally beating another person is a FELONY….You’re a LAWYER and don’t comprehend that simple, but ALL-CRUCIAL, distinction???
If Trayvon had not beaten Zimmerman, Trayvon would have been Completely RIGHT. And ALL of America would agree w/ Trayvon…..
Well shit, get whooped by a kid you outweigh by 40 pounds and you get to shoot him. Who knew? I’m not weighing in on the racial aspects of this sad case, but I will say this: George Zimmerman is a giant sissy. What kind of guy feels is it necessary to carry a gun with a hollow point in the chamber when they’re going to the store to pick up lunch meats for the kids? Good God, he was in Orlando, not Mogadishu.
Sorry, Dumb@$$…..Can’t put a man in jail for being a sissy…even if he is White-Hispanic, and the dude brutally beating him is White-Black…
True, but the sissy man sure did kill a teenager with that gun he was carrying to the store. Wonder what would have happened if he left his gun at home, drove back to his house after going to the store, and called the actual cops and stayed in his car when he saw a kid he didn’t recognize. Guess we’ll never know.
Zimmerman would not be a folk hero, and Trayvon would not have been compelled to sacrifice his life, because he did not have enough control to refrain from brutally beating an armed man…
Ever hear about Leroy Brown…Trayvon would have learned a lesson by going Old School Jim Croce, instead of Gangsta…
nd Big T, if you reversed this situation, you’d be the first one on here screaming this is Obama’s America where unarmed white teenagers are gunned down by a black men without being punishe. Just own it. It’s the internet. Nobody cares that you’re a racist.
Wonder what would have happened If Martin hadn’t assaulted him?
There’s not much difference between parts of Orlando and Mogadishu. Who could tell after dark??
Oh NO..you di-uhndt!
“What kind of guy feels is it necessary to carry a gun with a hollow point in the chamber when they’re going to the store to pick up lunch meats for the kids? ”
Probably the same type of person that studies MMA and routinely gets into fights to “practice” so he can “protect” himself while on the way to the store to get skittles and fruit punch.
Ugh, hoss, it was Zimmerman that was studying MMA. His defense is that after 18 months he still stunk at it. He was also the one that had a criminal record for resisting arrest. Yeah, solid citizen.
You got it wrong holmes, you are a classic case of spouting off with partial information in a misleading manner.
Zimmerman studied MMA(not well), and Trayvon was studying it too…and more athletic.
You can’t bitch about Zimmerman being smart about protecting himself given his low aptitude for MMA and claim that ole Skittles Trayvon wasn’t carrying a more effective weapon for hand to hand at the time.
It’s all a matter of perspective. You wanna call Zimmerman a sissy for having properly prepared to protect himself over Trayvon, so be it…I’ll just call him smarter and more effective.
Just a question. I don’t want to mess up my street cred (with the NSA) by using the Urban Dictionary and I realize that Google is not my friend. ..
Is it “Holmes”(like Sherlock?) or “Homes” (Homie….Homeboy)?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=holmes
Back at you, Homeslice! : ) http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=homes
speaking of UD,this is my favorite one,EVER
(No wonder straight buys are insane)
MEAT CURTAINS
The long, overly stretched out lips of a pussy, sometimes resembling philly cheese steak. Also known as: elephant ears, clappers, mud flaps, pounded cube steak, cube steak patties, dangly gizzard, and last (but not least), the giblet pouch.
ex:
Debbie’s meat curtains are so long, she has a curtain rod in her shower to hang her flaps over so she can squeegie them down.
I think chicks with big meat curtains are hot. I cannot believe that there are actually “doctors” out there doing plastic surgery to reduce meat curtains now. Seriously, they are called, “designer vaginas”.
Like breast reduction surgery, this should be labeled as a crime against nature.
One of my best friends is a retired stripper.She never got the surgery,but she has a really bad back,now.If you like straight guys and know a chick with humongous headlights,anything is possible.
The first time we met,she asked.,’Why are you looking at me in the eyes ,instead of my tits,and a wonderful friendship was born.
You have google on that computer? The kid was not taking MMA. Period. Go look it up, numbnuts. Second, Zimmerman outweighed the kid by 40 plus pounds. That’s the difference between a lightweight and a light heavyweight. And he was packing a weapon. Yeah, must have been one sorry ass fighter. Third, and I want you to read this slowly – Zimmerman plead guilty to a crime. He was allowed to have it expunged later, but that doesn’t change the fact he was arrested and plead guilty. The kid had texts about weed and fistfights. Big friggin deal. He was just a silly, bragging teenager. Facts are facts. Trying to portray Zimmerman as some solid citizen and the kid as a lawless street tough doesn’t fit those facts. Zimmerman is just a loser with a gun that got punched in the nose and shot a kid when he panicked. He’s no hero.
I didn’t say he was “taking MMA” douchebag. I said he was studying it:
FRIEND: Ohhh So It Wass 3 Rounds? Damn well at least yu wonn lol but yuu needa stop fighting bae Forreal
MARTIN: Nay im not done with fool….. he gone hav 2 see me again
FRIEND: Nooo… Stop, yuu waint gonn bee satisified till yuh suspended again, huh?
MARTIN: Naw but he aint breed nuff 4 me, only his nose
The fight followed the mixed martial arts (MMA) format. A day later, he would tell a friend that his opponent “got mo hits cause in da 1st round he had me on da ground nd I couldn’t do ntn.”
As his girlfriend complained, Martin was “always” fighting. He was also something of a sadist. His opponent, after all, did not bleed enough. Why might this be relevant?
Jonathan Good, the closest of the eyewitnesses to the shooting, testified last week that a there was a “black man in a black hoodie on top of either a white guy … or an Hispanic guy in a red sweater on the ground yelling out help,” and that black man on top was “throwing down blows on the guy MMA [mixed martial arts] style.”
via WND.com
If you can manage a google search yourself you’ll find he belonged to a “fight club”.
Ah, he was a member of a “fight club.” You mean he and his buds talked a bunch of smack and acted like a a bunch of little tough guys. As opposed to Zimmerman who actually took 18 months of professional training and was 40-50 pounds heavier. I box now at a gym with professional training. I also boxed in the backyard as a high school kid. I think I know the difference.
Here’s some testimony that suggests this little story about being beaten MMA style is a pure flight of fancy: “Testifying for the prosecution at Zimmerman’s trial, Medical Examiner Valerie Rao said she reviewed Zimmerman’s medical records and 36 pictures of his injuries taken at the police station after the fight. “They were not life-threatening. They were very insignificant,” Rao told the Seminole County criminal court jury.
Her best guess, he got punched once.
Who gives a shit how he got punched, how effective it was…if Zimmerman is the biggest pussy in the world, etc.
If he was punched first, he has every right to shoot Trayvon dead.
It’s just that simple. I’m not even assuming that it happened that way, but if it did-it’s justifiable.
Lesson for the thugs(white, black, asian, whoever), if you want to beat people up…then you can eat a bullet if they’ve taken precautions to defend themselves.
If Zimmerman started the altercation, then Trayvon was a victim.
Zimmerman was on patrol in a neighborhood with a theft problem, he has no duty to back away nor should he.
He was prepared to defend himself obviously regardless of his lack of MMA ability.
Trayvon had a history of drug use, fighting and 50 expulsions.
Zimmerman may be a wimp, but Trayvon might have been stupid and obviously dead.
Btw, the resisting arrest charges were dropped.
He also had a run in with the same police department a year prior to the Trayvon incident where Zimmerman forced the PD head to resign over the beating of a homless black man.
Coincidently, around the time of the resisting charges that were dropped.
It helps to understand the difference between having a “record” and being charged.
Yea, I’m sure the “racist” Zimmerman was a much better citizen than you’ll ever be.
When you go after a PD over one of their various violations of the law in an effort to get them to play lawfully let us know, especially in relation to black being abused.
It wasn’t dropped, it was expunged after a plea deal and rehab. He pleased guilty, you clown. And the kid wasn’t taking MMA, Zimmerman was. So pretty much everything you said is an unmitigated pile of shit. Nice work. Go read a paper
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/state-regional/zimmerman-of-sanford-has-past-arrest-charges-1/nLhz6/
“Msnbc.com reports that in 2005, Zimmerman was arrested and charged with “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer.” He was 20 years old at the time and both charges are third-degree felonies.
According to the report, the charges were reduced to “resisting officer without violence” and then waived when he entered an alcohol education program.”
“Msnbc.com reports that accounts indicated Zimermann shoved an officer who was questioning a friend for alleged underage drinking at a bar.”
Yes, unmitigated bullshit by you.
“What kind of guy feels is it necessary to carry a gun with a hollow
point in the chamber when they’re going to the store to pick up lunch
meats for the kids?”
That’s a terrible argument…You have insurance on your car and home? Why? You certainly don’t get in the car to go to work planning on getting in an accident. They are just that, accidents, you don’t know when you’re going to need it, but its good to have when you do.
If you’re like most people, you’ve spent hundreds if not thousands on insurance for years and never used it, it could be considered wasted money. But that one time you total your $20,000 car it sure is nice to have.
Same concept, coming out of Target that night, he could have been carjacked or robbed, it would be nice to have to defend himself. Saying to only carry when you need it is pointless, yes certain areas have a better chance of it being needed, but if that’s the case, why go to those areas in the first place?
“What kind of guy feels is it necessary to carry a gun with a hollow point in the chamber when they’re going to the store to pick up lunch meats for the kids?”
Probably the kind of guy who reads the crime reports for his part of the world and who wants to be sure of making it home to his kids with the lunch meat. It would have been so much better if the young mother of four who was murdered recently had adopted that philosophy.
Live in fear much? Must suck to go through life with that mentality.
Good God, he was in Orlando, not Mogadishu.
RACISSSSSSSS.
A fucking scaredy-ass wimp, that’s what kind of guy.
His cock sucking skills are still mediocre(a challenge I readily acknowledge),at best,but he has already mastered the art of being the quintessential bottom.
He has one of the greediest butts I’ve ever encountered,and he’s trying to learn how to make it talk,so give him a break.
The thing that really does piss me off,though,is afterwards;he wants to be,’held’…
I have to admit, the Mogadishu part of your comment did make me laugh.
I know someone who was carjacked while buying gas, though, so I can’t blame anyone for wanting to protect themselves in any situation, no matter how seemingly non-threatening their trip outside their home is.
Also, hollow points are the only thing I carry for my concealed weapon. I shoot FMJs for target practice, but that’s because they’re cheaper.
You are correct sir! I also carry, legally, and only carry loaded with hollow points. I soot at the range with FMJ. I do use up hollow points when they are old enough to be replaced. That makes sure the weapon is feeding them properly.
If I had to pull the trigger, and I pray God I do not, I want the round to be effective and stay within the target.
Guess we all better live in fear when we see folks wearing dark hoodies and that includes whites who also wear them……geeezzz! Its time for get over the color of one’s skin as its just a color.
Did you read the article she linked to about everyone being a little bit
racist? It was written by a black woman who understands that. I give
the author here credit for admitting her own latent bias. That’s honest. But not everyone displays that bias in the same way.
It’s naive to believe that everyone is completely colorblind, but it
still doesn’t make it okay to shoot someone out of prejudice. And I liked her point about how the decision was in line with the law, but that the law needs to be changed.
Guess we all better live in fear when we see folks wearing dark hoodies and that includes whites who also wear them
MSNBC fucked up and ended up showing a picture of Trayvon’s dead body that was being shown in the trial. Gawker then posted a copy of that picture online. To spare posting a link, the hoodie he was wearing was a grayish colored hoodie, with khakis for pants and white/red shoes. The hoodie was somewhat baggy, the pants were not baggy at all.
Considering this happened in February (cooler temperatures), and it was raining, a hoodie shouldn’t be automatically suspicious anyways.
And the writer here didn’t even mention a hoodie… Mguzman, are you perhaps bringing some talking points to an article that aren’t actually in it?
Grayish? Come on Smirks. That’s a black hoodie, faded to charcoal gray at best.
In the picture in question, there were people wearing darker colored pants in the background than the color of his hoodie. That’s what I was going on.
It is hard to tell in the photo though since the lighting isn’t great.
Absolutely! Please show me a violent crime committed in public in Columbia, by a white or black, where the perpetrator was not wearing a hoodie. Not all wearing hoodies are criminals, but it appears that all criminals wear them.
When did looking THUG become sheek?
Guess we all better live in fear when we see folks wearing dark hoodies and that includes whites who also wear them……geeezzz! Its time for get over the color of one’s skin as its just a color.
Did you read the article she linked to about everyone being a little bit
racist? It was written by a black woman who understands that. I give
the author here credit for admitting her own latent bias. That’s honest. But not everyone displays that bias in the same way.
It’s naive to believe that everyone is completely colorblind, but it
still doesn’t make it okay to shoot someone out of prejudice. And I liked her point about how the decision was in line with the law, but that the law needs to be changed.
Guess we all better live in fear when we see folks wearing dark hoodies and that includes whites who also wear them
MSNBC fucked up and ended up showing a picture of Trayvon’s dead body that was being shown in the trial. Gawker then posted a copy of that picture online. To spare posting a link, the hoodie he was wearing was a grayish colored hoodie, with khakis for pants and white/red shoes. The hoodie was somewhat baggy, the pants were not baggy at all.
Considering this happened in February (cooler temperatures), and it was raining, a hoodie shouldn’t be automatically suspicious anyways.
And the writer here didn’t even mention a hoodie… Mguzman, are you perhaps bringing some talking points to an article that aren’t actually in it?
Grayish? Come on Smirks. That’s a black hoodie, faded to charcoal gray at best.
In the picture in question, there were people wearing darker colored pants in the background than the color of his hoodie. That’s what I was going on.
It is hard to tell in the photo though since the lighting isn’t great.
Absolutely! Please show me a violent crime committed in public in Columbia, by a white or black, where the perpetrator was not wearing a hoodie. Not all wearing hoodies are criminals, but it appears that all criminals wear them.
When did looking THUG become sheek?
A cogent analysis, though not breaking any new ground here.
Someday people are going to wake up and realize it is a battlefield out there for many citizens. Sorry, Amy, the Marquis of Queensbury Rules do not apply here, and we don’t need any further soul searching on minority rights.
Look at the body count in Chicago any given weekend. If the NAACP or Justice Department want to do some good, solve that tragedy.
The Zimmerman case is just another opportunity for the race hustlers and media to jerk off our nation. Travon had four minutes to clear the area, but hung around. Evidence indicates he cold-cocked Zimmerman.
No amount of hang-ringing is going to deter an individual intent on inflicting bodily harm. Unfortunately, it’s law of the jungle out there and it will not be getting better so long as that white-African American is president.
“The Zimmerman case is just another opportunity for the race hustlers and
media to jerk off our nation. Trayvon had four minutes to clear the
area, but hung around.”
When GZ thought he saw something suspicious he contacted the authorities. When TM saw something suspicious, ie some “crazy cracker” following him, he called his girl and hung around to confront him.
You are exactly right, in 4 minutes he could have been back home lighting up another joint…but he didn’t.
In four minutes, Zimmerman could have stayed in his car, after he called the cops and they told him help was on the way, avoiding a confrontation all together. Why put himself in that situation? He wasn’t a cop.
“He (Trayvon) called his girl and hung around to confront him.”
How do you know Martin “hung around?” How do you know he wasn’t walking away as Zimmerman was pursuing him, calling his girl because he was afraid? You don’t.
re Z: Doing stupid things is STILL not illegal……..
Re T: You’re right, Travon could have been casing residences, stalking Z, barking at the moon, etc. Again, approx 4 minutes where Z did not see T – pitch black evening – who knows…
But the fact that T was still in the vicinity on a dark evening, even after being visually confronted by Z and given ample opportunity to either come clean or leave raises the prospect of mischief, or burglary, or whatever
Come clean about what? You’re assuming that he was doing something wrong. The kid had as much of a right to be there as Zimmerman did – he was walking to the house where he was staying. Why do you assume he was up to something? Why would he need to explain himself to a dude who got out of his car to follow him? “Visually confronted?” You call walking/running after someone so quickly that you’re panting (heard on call that Z made to police) “visually confronting” someone? Why did Martin not have a right to stand his ground against a stranger who was following him as he walked home in the dark, which is not a crime. Don’t we teach our kids not to talk to strangers? Martin had no obligation to explain anything to Zimmerman.
Whatever. Keep convincing yourself of that, though don’t believe everything Reverends Al and Jesse tell you.
According to evidence, T struck the first blow. If Z was really out to get him, the weapon would have been drawn. Even the Sanford Police had FBI training on profiling suspicious activity, and T fit the bill. Panting? Evidence showed wind speed over 5 knots that evening, but no “panting” definitively identifying heavy physical exertion.
If it walks like a duck and flies like a duck…………
And good luck the next time you’re getting your ass kicked by a hoodie and no one assists. Karma is a bitch!
No one knows…..the only one left around to tell the story is Zimmerman. Are we really surprised that he said it was Martin’s fault?
Bubba ,by your name we can tell u are a RED-NECK,and what u write is probably what you would have done! You’re just a bias republican who wants trouble as usual!
jerk off our nation!!!??? It’s raining enough,already,and now we’re gonna drown in cum???!
I think George Zimmerman was the one intent on inflicting bodily harm here. If he weren’t, he would have stayed in the car.
You are such a smart man to blame this on a white-
African American President(notice how u left the w small on white)you AH republican!
If you’re going to insult someone,could you,please not do such a lackadaisical job,asshole ?
Do you mean like,Pat Benatar? Love Is A Battlefield? What happened to that log chomping beaver?
A cogent analysis, though not breaking any new ground here.
Someday people are going to wake up and realize it is a battlefield out there for many citizens. Sorry, Amy, the Marquis of Queensbury Rules do not apply here, and we don’t need any further soul searching on minority rights.
Look at the body count in Chicago any given weekend. If the NAACP or Justice Department want to do some good, solve that tragedy.
The Zimmerman case is just another opportunity for the race hustlers and media to jerk off our nation. Travon had four minutes to clear the area, but hung around. Evidence indicates he cold-cocked Zimmerman.
No amount of hang-ringing is going to deter an individual intent on inflicting bodily harm. Unfortunately, it’s law of the jungle out there and it will not be getting better so long as that white-African American is president.
“The Zimmerman case is just another opportunity for the race hustlers and
media to jerk off our nation. Trayvon had four minutes to clear the
area, but hung around.”
When GZ thought he saw something suspicious he contacted the authorities. When TM saw something suspicious, ie some “crazy cracker” following him, he called his girl and hung around to confront him.
You are exactly right, in 4 minutes he could have been back home lighting up another joint…but he didn’t.
In four minutes, Zimmerman could have stayed in his car, after he called the cops and they told him help was on the way, avoiding a confrontation all together. Why put himself in that situation? He wasn’t a cop.
“He (Trayvon) called his girl and hung around to confront him.”
How do you know Martin “hung around?” How do you know he wasn’t walking away as Zimmerman was pursuing him, calling his girl because he was afraid? You don’t.
re Z: Doing stupid things is STILL not illegal……..
Re T: You’re right, Travon could have been casing residences, stalking Z, barking at the moon, etc. Again, approx 4 minutes where Z did not see T – pitch black evening – who knows…
But the fact that T was still in the vicinity on a dark evening, even after being visually confronted by Z and given ample opportunity to either come clean or leave raises the prospect of mischief, or burglary, or whatever
Come clean about what? You’re assuming that he was doing something wrong. The kid had as much of a right to be there as Zimmerman did – he was walking to the house where he was staying. Why do you assume he was up to something? Why would he need to explain himself to a dude who got out of his car to follow him? “Visually confronted?” You call walking/running after someone so quickly that you’re panting (heard on call that Z made to police) “visually confronting” someone? Why did Martin not have a right to stand his ground against a stranger who was following him as he walked home in the dark, which is not a crime. Don’t we teach our kids not to talk to strangers? Martin had no obligation to explain anything to Zimmerman.
Whatever. Keep convincing yourself of that, though don’t believe everything Reverends Al and Jesse tell you.
According to evidence, T struck the first blow. If Z was really out to get him, the weapon would have been drawn. Even the Sanford Police had FBI training on profiling suspicious activity, and T fit the bill. Panting? Evidence showed wind speed over 5 knots that evening, but no “panting” definitively identifying heavy physical exertion.
If it walks like a duck and flies like a duck…………
And good luck the next time you’re getting your ass kicked by a hoodie and no one assists. Karma is a bitch!
No one knows…..the only one left around to tell the story is Zimmerman. Are we really surprised that he said it was Martin’s fault?
Bubba ,by your name we can tell u are a RED-NECK,and what u write is probably what you would have done! You’re just a bias republican who wants trouble as usual!
jerk off our nation!!!??? It’s raining enough,already,and now we’re gonna drown in cum???!
I think George Zimmerman was the one intent on inflicting bodily harm here. If he weren’t, he would have stayed in the car.
You are such a smart man to blame this on a white-
African American President(notice how u left the w small on white)you AH republican!
If you’re going to insult someone,could you,please not do such a lackadaisical job,asshole ?
Do you mean like,Pat Benatar? Love Is A Battlefield? What happened to that log chomping beaver?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc#at=173
Thanks for posting the link to that video. It has a lot of info I hadn’t heard before. I encourage anyone commenting here to watch it.
The best information on this yet! Thanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc#at=173
Thanks for posting the link to that video. It has a lot of info I hadn’t heard before. I encourage anyone commenting here to watch it.
The best information on this yet! Thanks.
Liberals seem to have trouble understanding the simple and basic truths of life.
You don’t jump and brutally beat a White-Hispanic, MMA Style, if the White Hispanic happens to be packing….Being a White-Black male is not enough to save your life, or convict the man you brutally beat…
Zimmerman’s injuries were “minor,” you mouthbreathing ass clown.
A broken NOSE…MINOR???
I BEG YOU… I BEG You to sneak up and attack me and try to brutally beat me like that, while I have my weapon. I BEG You..and unless you are a White-Black American, like Trayvon obviously was…I doubt they’ll do a d@*# thing to me when I enact my right to do to you what your Thug @$$ deserves….
He got ‘weapon’ in there OWB. Still gunnin’?
Is it Friday yet? Anyone? Anyone?
Yes, you pussy. MINOR.
Sorry. Puncture wounds are not minor. The less they bleed, the more damage there likely is.
A broken NOSE…MINOR???
Broken noses are common in a lot of fights. It doesn’t take a strong person to break a nose, just a well-placed punch. I would consider the injuries to the back of his head more serious.
Well, that said…they’ll Blow an ignorant MoFo Thug away for it in Fla. and walk scot-free, you stupid son of a B!*#h…..and there ain’t a d@*n thing you can do about it, except stand there and scratch your @$$…….
Stupid F*#ks like you, telling these Punks the law don’t apply to them,…and they get blown up..and you standing around acting like the Dumb@$$ you are, afterward…
I had a guy following me once at night and I told him I was going to beat the shit out of him if he didn’t stop harassing me. this guy got into my shit while I’m minding my own business, I fucked him up. If HE had a gun and shot me, it would have been fine?
GrandTango • a few seconds ago
?
OMG: OmG OMG….Rush is reporting that rachel jeantel said Trayvon went MMA on Zimmerman because Zimmerman was GAY (Trayvon thought)….
‘Creepy @$$ Cracker’ was describing Zimmerman as a Gay Rapist Pervert…
“Hide Yo’ wife, Hide Yo’ Kids, Hide Ya husband too…they rapin’ er’body up in here”…Hahahahahaha….
LMAO…you Dumb@$$#$,….I know you will IGNORE this BLOCKBUSTER, Earth-Changing News…..
But if you people were not STUPID, you’d be invisible…LMAO…OMG…you FREAKIN Dolts….This is HILARIOUS….Hahahahha….
Can’t wait t to hear Lizenby’s EXPERT analysis of Homophone attacks Gay….but I won’t hold my breath…
You Keystone Cops and A car full of Crowns all in one…LMAO!!!!!
How’s a kid or anyone know if someone like Zimmerman isn’t a raoist, robber stalking them while minding their own biz? You really are beyond help.
He thought he was a GAY Perv…LMAO…you FRAEKIN Dumb@$$….He screwed you up the pooper…you IDIOT!!!!
A black woman living in Fla, who had a restraining order against her husband, is now in prison for 20 years because when he came to her home and threatened her she fired a warning shot over his head……….soooooo,if she had killed him ,could she have walked?
Part of the problem with that case is mandatory sentencing laws, which are inherently stupid.
Is he African-American???…Likely thought all she had to do was show up for court, and be exonerated…
She must’ve had a cliché-liberal-idiot for an attorney.
PS: if he was a white dude, and she is black, she could kill him and walk…see OJ…so you are right about that…
That’s why there’s not any blacks in our prison system! Thanks, BigT!!!
First, shoot him
Second, shoot him again
Third, locate largest kitchen knife and place in his hand making sure his prints get on the handle
Fourth, rip your clothes, rip them some more
Fifth, stand in front of counter, bend over, put both hands behind your head and slam your face into the counter
Sixth, cry, if you are not able to cry by now put one finger in a drawer and slam it shut
Seventh, call 911 and scream, just scream, no words, automated system should pick up your address
Eighth, make your way to front door, drop down and position your body half in and half out the door
Ninth, say nothing absolutely nothing to anyone who shows up, just keep screaming and crying
Tenth, the first and only person you will talk to is your attorney
Personal yet professional. I Like It.
The only thing I would add is after slamming your face into the counter, get some of the blood from your face and put it between the intruders fingertips and the handle of the knife.
You know. LIke Martha. The ‘little’ things in life.
While the premise is sound, I would have to revise my statement based on the new information submitted below. In her case she should run outside with the firearm pointed directly in front of her and change the verbiage of the scream itself.
Jim Lewis you’re good!
I wanted to post a bit more on this.
There’s two things you learn in CWP training regarding a weapon:
1) You do not point your gun at anything you are not willing to have destroyed.
2) When shooting a person in self defense, the correct way to aim is for center mass. (This is not to “guarantee” a kill or anything, it is simply to increase the chances of hitting the intended target. This is why you do NOT aim for a leg or hand or other extremity.)
The fact that she freely admits she was not trying to hit the intended target should (1) make one question whether she truly felt she was in so much danger that deadly force was necessary, as she was not directing said deadly force at the aggressor, and (2) that she could have put someone else in danger as she – not accidentally mind you – intentionally missed him. What makes it worse is that she wasn’t just shooting at the ground, she was shooting in the air, meaning the bullet could travel through the wall and put others at danger.
She’s not 100% innocent, even if she truly felt like she was acting in self defense. 20 years may be too harsh, but at least if she had intended to hit the guy, she wouldn’t have potentially endangered others. It would have also given her more credibility to the notion of self defense.
Smirks, smart analysis…also the exboyfriend/husband testified that when she came back inside the house from her vehicle…she closed her eyes and pulled the trigger. It would help to know what time of gun she brought into the house…was it a .22 or a .44 Magnum.
You may want to check the facts before you just copy and paste a Huffington Post story. The woman was not at her house….she was at his house. They got in an argument…then she left the house and went outside to retrieve a weapon from her car. Once she got back inside…she fired the weapon. Check your facts next time dumb ass.
Oh well. That is slightly different. :) Good Catch
I think you need to actually research that case. Restraining order but she went to his home with the kids. She leaves the house, obtains a firearm, comes back and shoots.
Stand your ground or self defense? Ah, no.
A black woman living in Fla, who had a restraining order against her husband, is now in prison for 20 years because when he came to her home and threatened her she fired a warning shot over his head……….soooooo,if she had killed him ,could she have walked?
Part of the problem with that case is mandatory sentencing laws, which are inherently stupid.
First
Personal yet professional. I Like It.
The only thing I would add is after slamming your face into the counter, get some of the blood from your face and put it between the intruders fingertips and the handle of the knife.
You know. LIke Martha. The ‘little’ things in life.
While the premise is sound, I would have to revise my statement based on the new information submitted below. In her case she should run outside with the firearm pointed directly in front of her and change the verbiage of the scream itself.
Jim Lewis you’re good!
I wanted to post a bit more on this.
There’s two things you learn in CWP training regarding a weapon:
1) You do not point your gun at anything you are not willing to have destroyed.
2) When shooting a person in self defense, the correct way to aim is for center mass. (This is not to “guarantee” a kill or anything, it is simply to increase the chances of hitting the intended target. This is why you do NOT aim for a leg or hand or other extremity.)
The fact that she freely admits she was not trying to hit the intended target should (1) make one question whether she truly felt she was in so much danger that deadly force was necessary, as she was not directing said deadly force at the aggressor, and (2) that she could have put someone else in danger as she – not accidentally mind you – intentionally missed him. What makes it worse is that she wasn’t just shooting at the ground, she was shooting in the air, meaning the bullet could travel through the wall and put others at danger.
She’s not 100% innocent, even if she truly felt like she was acting in self defense. 20 years may be too harsh, but at least if she had intended to hit the guy, she wouldn’t have potentially endangered others. It would have also given her more credibility to the notion of self defense.
Smirks, smart analysis…also the exboyfriend/husband testified that when she came back inside the house from her vehicle…she closed her eyes and pulled the trigger. It would help to know what time of gun she brought into the house…was it a .22 or a .44 Magnum.
You may want to check the facts before you just copy and paste a Huffington Post story. The woman was not at her house….she was at his house. They got in an argument…then she left the house and went outside to retrieve a weapon from her car. Once she got back inside…she fired the weapon. Check your facts next time dumb ass.
Oh well. That is slightly different. :) Good Catch
I think you need to actually research that case. Restraining order but she went to his home with the kids. She leaves the house, obtains a firearm, comes back and shoots.
Stand your ground or self defense? Ah, no.
Anybody else PRAYING Obama uses the DOJ and hideous Holder to go after Zimmerman on behalf of the Race-Hate, Liberal Bigot Voters…??? (now that’s a FRESH article, Lizenby)….just handle it fresh…not like all the lock-stepper, spoiled children, at MSNBC…
That will all but assure the GOP BIG wins in Congress and maybe the Senate in 2014. Not to mention Statehouse wins across the country….Please do it Barry..PLEASE!!!!
The FBI said race was NOT a motive or factor when the defendant pulled out his 9mm to get the attacker off him.
Reality will not stop Obama. He does what he wants.
The real question is whether race was a factor when Zimmerman decided to follow a teenager who was minding his own business, walking in a place he had every right to be.
And if anyone knows how to predict a BIG GOP win, it’s BigT. How’s the Romney Administration doing, big guy?
Amy, darling, the truth is that both Martin and Z were legally in a place they had a right to be. We know Z could have stayed in his car. We also know Martin had made it to his destination and he could have just walked inside and nothing would have happened to either of them. Instead Martin circled back and confronted Z, not the other way around as you said.Then Martin sucker punched Z in the nose knocking him down and continued to beat him in the head slamming his head onto the concrete. What was Z to do? Die just to please you and the Blacks? No, he defended himself the best way he could. He shot Martin. The only race baiting was with Martin who called Z a “White Cracker”. You seemed to miss the point entirely. It was not about race, it was a bout a street fight where one guy killed his attacker rather than being killed by the attacker. The jury agrees with the facts and I can’t understand why you don’t.
As I have said to everyone else who has presented this “argument” – how do you know that “Martin circled back and confronted Z, not the other way around as you
said. Then Martin sucker punched Z in the nose knocking him down and
continued to beat him in the head slamming his head onto the concrete?” There were no eye witnesses to the entire confrontation except Martin, who is dead, and Zimmerman, who admits to changing his story several times. You have no way of knowing that what you just said actually happened, so don’t present it as fact.
Thanks for trying, Please. I’m trying to do the same thing. Both the prosecution and the defense admitted that there were no eyewitnesses to the entire confrontation (except Z, who, like you said, changed up his story a few times), despite the fact that several people here claim to know exactly what transpired.
I know because I listened to the trial. The girl Martin was talking to on the phone mentioned it in her testimony, and I saw the photos of Z’s face and head. Martin had one wound. A gun shot. Seems I know, and the jury knows. You are the only one who doesn’t know the facts.
So did I. Do you have a clip of her testimony that supports what you’re saying? Are you referring to this exchange between defense attorney Don West and Rachel Jeantel?
West:
“You figured if Trayvon Martin was getting ready to sucker punch
someone and get in a fight, he would have told you, ‘Let me take care of this and I’ll call you right back?”
Jeantel:
“No sir, he would not allow me on the phone with him if he was about the have a fight,” Jeantel answered.
How does that establish that Martin circled back and confronted Zimmerman? It doesn’t. And even if he had (we don’t know), would Martin not have a right to turn around and confront a man who was following him in the dark as he did nothing but walk back to where he was staying?
As to Zimmerman’s injuries, they establish only that there was a fight, not who started it.
I don’t have a transcript and I didn’t believe everything Jeantel said but she did say enough to confirm Martin was going to confront Z. Confronting him is not wrong. Sucker punching him was. Beating him to the ground was. Most of the stuff the defense and the prosecution said and did, and the time line they tried to prove and disprove, was nothing more than smoke and mirrors spin. Nothing bad or illegal had happened until ( I believe ) Martin threw the first punch and the fight was on. Z was clearly over matched, scared and used the only weapon he had. A gun. Disqus, please don’t get me wrong. I watched this trial, but I never particularly liked Z. I think he was a wannabe mama’s boy. The HOA needed a neighborhood watch. He volunteered and the HOA accepted him, But I think he was the wrong guy for the job. I firmly believe Martin confronted him and he really didn’t know how to handle Martin, either verbally or physically and was getting beaten up pretty bad, so he reacted, (legally) the only way he could. Forget, the smoke and mirrors and focus on the narrow issue of the fight and the narrow legal limits of the self defense laws and the jury came up with the only verdict possible. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors.
Please don’t take offense, because I do like you and i like debating with you.
I don’t take offense, thank you, but what you “believe” happened, when you weren’t there, and neither evidence nor testimony was presented to support your version of events, just cannot be presented as fact.
Well, the experts and the cops agree with me and they believed Z. I think the evidence presented does support fact.
And plenty of experts and cops disagree with you and don’t believe Zimmerman. In the end, though, what the jury did is the only thing that matters. The jurors followed the law, so I find no fault with them, but I agree with Lazenby that the law is flawed.
What part of the law do you think is flawed? A person should have the right to defend themselves, or do you disagree with that? When the trial was over and the Fla. Attorney General was speaking she said the law would not have been as complicated if the shooting had taken place in one’s home or business. She thought the problem came when the shooting took place on common ground where both parties had a perfect right to be. I agree with her on that. I really don’t think the Then it get’s back to the fight and Z’s fear of death.
How would you change the law? Would you make it illegal for one to defend oneself? That will never happen.
I’m going to answer you in a separate thread so that my answer does not get lost in this long chain of comments.
Neither were you!!
Band-Aids…the knuckle/joint kind I bought at Family Dollar a couple of weeks ago because they were on clearance completely covered Zimmerman’s “wounds”, per the zideo.
How is that getting beaten up pretty bad?
As someone who looked at and photographed the physical injuries that parents do to their children for 13 years, the injuries do not coincide with the description of how they happened.
If George Zimmerman’s head had been repeatedly pounded into concrete, he would have had large, scraped raw areas all over the back of his head with substantial bruising. Not just 2 scrapes that could be covered with Band-Aids.
If he hadn’t defended himself and stopped the beating when he did would the woulds have been worse? Would he be alive today?
Did he break his own nose? He did what he did within the law.
You mean you don’t consider Martin to be standing his ground by punching the guy in the gun in the nose with the only weapon he had – besides the Skittles and plastic tea bottle? When did Martin lose HIS right to defend HIS unarmed self? He didn’t go looking for a way to prove his manhood against those “assholes” the way Zimmerman did?
Or, is it only OK when white guys stand their ground?
This kind of armed behavior against an unarmed man was not acceptable or condoned even in the Old West.
The old adage, Old Man Colt made everyone equal!!
I’m a big fan of Family Dollar,and all ,’Dollar ‘ stores,even if wealthy people wouldn’t be caught dead in one,so I’m gonna open a chain of Million Dollar stores…
He didn’t and you wouldn’t allow it to go that far, unless you have a death wish!!
Your full of crap. Bruises yes, but scrapes do not come from pounding. Punctures do, which is what the back of his head looked like.
No sir, he would not allow me on the phone with him if he was about the have a fight,” Jeantel answered.
While Ms. Jeantel did not come across as very knowledgeable about a whole lot…she sure knew TM’s cell phone/fighting protocols. Funny, that.
Dead men cannot testify. That’s why you should always, shoot to kill!!
ARRRGH! Where’s me fracking patch? Stupid birdy. ARRRRGGGHHH!
Or start a fight and be sure to take out the only witness. Totally legit.
The only evidence we have that Martin initiated the confrontation is Zimmerman’s pre-trial statement. Martin couldn’t make a statement, because Zimmerman killed him.
I
sbuster1 you must have your head stuck so far up your ass to believe what you are writing. The fact of the matter is that TM was walking in his neighborhood to his home and was confronted by some wannabe vigilante cop. Sure TM could have said “yasssir”, “i’m a just goin home massa” and been fine. But we don’t live in the 50’s anymore. Point is the laws are such that someone can initiate a fight – and once there is mutual combat both sides are acting lawfully and can defend themselves with deadly force. One side started the confrontation and had a gun. The other side had a bag of skittles.
Yep. Which is why the laws need to change, like she said.
subster – do you think GZ would have confronted a white guy walking through that neighborhood. It is all about race.
Amy, darling, the truth is that both Martin and Z were legally in a place they had a right to be. We know Z could have stayed in his car. We also know Martin had made it to his destination and he could have just walked inside and nothing would have happened to either of them. Instead Martin circled back and confronted Z, not the other way around as you said.Then Martin sucker punched Z in the nose knocking him down and continued to beat him in the head slamming his head onto the concrete. What was Z to do? Die just to please you and the Blacks? No, he defended himself the best way he could. He shot Martin. The only race baiting was with Martin who called Z a “White Cracker”. You seemed to miss the point entirely. It was not about race, it was a bout a street fight where one guy killed his attacker rather than being killed by the attacker. The jury agrees with the facts and I can’t understand why you don’t.
As I have said to everyone else who has presented this “argument” – how do you know that “Martin circled back and confronted Z, not the other way around as you
said. Then Martin sucker punched Z in the nose knocking him down and
continued to beat him in the head slamming his head onto the concrete?” There were no eye witnesses to the entire confrontation except Martin, who is dead, and Zimmerman, who admits to changing his story several times. You have no way of knowing that what you just said actually happened, so don’t present it as fact.
Thanks for trying, Please. I’m trying to do the same thing. Both the prosecution and the defense admitted that there were no eyewitnesses to the entire confrontation (except Z, who, like you said, changed up his story a few times), despite the fact that several people here claim to know exactly what transpired.
I know because I listened to the trial. The girl Martin was talking to on the phone mentioned it in her testimony, and I saw the photos of Z’s face and head. Martin had one wound. A gun shot. Seems I know, and the jury knows. You are the only one who doesn’t know the facts.
So did I. Do you have a clip of her testimony that supports what you’re saying? Are you referring to this exchange between defense attorney Don West and Rachel Jeantel?
West:
“You figured if Trayvon Martin was getting ready to sucker punch
someone and get in a fight, he would have told you, ‘Let me take care of this and I’ll call you right back?”
Jeantel:
“No sir, he would not allow me on the phone with him if he was about the have a fight,” Jeantel answered.
How does that establish that Martin circled back and confronted Zimmerman? It doesn’t. And even if he had (we don’t know), would Martin not have a right to turn around and confront a man who was following him in the dark as he did nothing but walk back to where he was staying?
As to Zimmerman’s injuries, they establish only that there was a fight, not who started it.
I don’t have a transcript and I didn’t believe everything Jeantel said but she did say enough to confirm Martin was going to confront Z. Confronting him is not wrong. Sucker punching him was. Beating him to the ground was. Most of the stuff the defense and the prosecution said and did, and the time line they tried to prove and disprove, was nothing more than smoke and mirrors spin. Nothing bad or illegal had happened until ( I believe ) Martin threw the first punch and the fight was on. Z was clearly over matched, scared and used the only weapon he had. A gun. Disqus, please don’t get me wrong. I watched this trial, but I never particularly liked Z. I think he was a wannabe mama’s boy. The HOA needed a neighborhood watch. He volunteered and the HOA accepted him, But I think he was the wrong guy for the job. I firmly believe Martin confronted him and he really didn’t know how to handle Martin, either verbally or physically and was getting beaten up pretty bad, so he reacted, (legally) the only way he could. Forget, the smoke and mirrors and focus on the narrow issue of the fight and the narrow legal limits of the self defense laws and the jury came up with the only verdict possible. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors.
Please don’t take offense, because I do like you and i like debating with you.
I don’t take offense, thank you, but what you “believe” happened, when you weren’t there, and neither evidence nor testimony was presented to support your version of events, just cannot be presented as fact.
Well, the experts and the cops agree with me and they believed Z. I think the evidence presented does support fact.
And plenty of experts and cops disagree with you and don’t believe Zimmerman. In the end, though, what the jury did is the only thing that matters. The jurors followed the law, so I find no fault with them, but I agree with Lazenby that the law is flawed.
What part of the law do you think is flawed? A person should have the right to defend themselves, or do you disagree with that? When the trial was over and the Fla. Attorney General was speaking she said the law would not have been as complicated if the shooting had taken place in one’s home or business. She thought the problem came when the shooting took place on common ground where both parties had a perfect right to be. I agree with her on that. I really don’t think the Then it get’s back to the fight and Z’s fear of death.
How would you change the law? Would you make it illegal for one to defend oneself? That will never happen.
I’m going to answer you in a separate thread so that my answer does not get lost in this long chain of comments.
Neither were you!!
Band-Aids…the knuckle/joint kind I bought at Family Dollar a couple of weeks ago because they were on clearance completely covered Zimmerman’s “wounds”, per the video.
How is that getting beaten up pretty bad?
As someone who looked at and photographed the physical injuries that parents do to their children for 13 years, his injuries do not coincide with his description of how they happened.
If George Zimmerman’s head had been repeatedly pounded into concrete, he would have had large, scraped raw areas all over the back of his head with substantial bruising. Not just 2 scrapes that could be covered with Band-Aids.
If he hadn’t defended himself and stopped the beating when he did would the woulds have been worse? Would he be alive today?
Did he break his own nose? He did what he did within the law.
You mean you don’t consider Martin to be standing his ground by punching the guy with the gun in the nose with the only weapon he had – besides the Skittles and plastic tea bottle? When did Martin lose HIS right to defend HIS unarmed self? He didn’t go looking for a way to prove his manhood against those “assholes” the way Zimmerman did?
Or, is it only OK when white guys stand their ground?
This kind of armed behavior against an unarmed man was not acceptable or condoned even in the Old West – where people had to check their guns with the sheriff when they came into town.
The old adage, Old Man Colt made everyone equal!!
I’m a big fan of Family Dollar,and all ,’Dollar ‘ stores,even if wealthy people wouldn’t be caught dead in one,so I’m gonna open a chain of Million Dollar stores…
He didn’t and you wouldn’t allow it to go that far, unless you have a death wish!!
Your full of crap. Bruises yes, but scrapes do not come from pounding. Punctures do, which is what the back of his head looked like.
No sir, he would not allow me on the phone with him if he was about the have a fight,” Jeantel answered.
While Ms. Jeantel did not come across as very knowledgeable about a whole lot…she sure knew TM’s cell phone/fighting protocols. Funny, that.
Dead men cannot testify. That’s why you should always, shoot to kill!!
ARRRGH! Where’s me fracking patch? Stupid birdy. ARRRRGGGHHH!
Or start a fight and be sure to take out the only witness. Totally legit.
The only evidence we have that Martin initiated the confrontation is Zimmerman’s pre-trial statement. Martin couldn’t make a statement, because Zimmerman killed him.
I
sbuster1 you must have your head stuck so far up your ass to believe what you are writing. The fact of the matter is that TM was walking in his neighborhood to his home and was confronted by some wannabe vigilante cop. Sure TM could have said “yasssir”, “i’m a just goin home massa” and been fine. But we don’t live in the 50’s anymore. Point is the laws are such that someone can initiate a fight – and once there is mutual combat both sides are acting lawfully and can defend themselves with deadly force. One side started the confrontation and had a gun. The other side had a bag of skittles.
Yep. Which is why the laws need to change, like she said.
subster – do you think GZ would have confronted a white guy walking through that neighborhood. It is all about race.
Zimmerman is an animal. I hope when he gets his due no charges are made.
He knows he got away with murder,and is now ‘in a prison of his own device’.Look at what happened to,OJ…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht7mxF9XZiA
Zimmerman is an animal. I hope when he gets his due no charges are made.
He knows he got away with murder,and is now ‘in a prison of his own device’.Look at what happened to,OJ…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht7mxF9XZiA
What about something on the case of Kelly Hunnewell!
What about something on the case of Kelly Hunnewell!
I was a child protective services worker for 13 years. I regularly called and was called by LE dispatch about going out on cases together. Dispatch facilitated our cooperation.
To try and convince me that dispatch does not operate the way that LE wants them to operate, indeed, acts as LE’s agent/representative to the community, amounts to ridiculous obfuscation.
I grew up with parents telling me if I ever had contact with LE, I was to say “yes, sir”, “no, sir” and follow their instructions. (I am 62 years old and white.)
Therefore, to expect me to come down on the side of the person who willfully, intentionally disregarded what the LE representative/dispatch told him to do just doesn’t fly.
I bet a lot of Zimmerman supporters grew up with parents telling them the same thing mine did about how to interact with LE. Those people need to seriously look at how and why they can now support the man who disregarded LE /dispatch instructions and ended up killing an unarmed person who would have never had the chance to injure him to the extent that he had to cover those scrapes/scratches with Band-Aids — Band-Aids — IF he had only listened to what LE/dispatch told him to do.
Most cops I know, from a WIDE assortment of jurisdictions and geographical areas, will willingly attest to how incredibly stupid and incompetent many of their dispatchers are. While there are some good ones who are professional and competent with their job, the cops I know swear that incompetence and being a half-wit must be a prerequisite for employment at their dispatch centers.
My own personal experience as an end-user of dispatch services when attempting to call in suspicious situations, persons, or events, bears this out.
Listening to recordings of dispatchers telling citizens to “don’t shoot”, or “put the gun away” as their homes are being broken in to by criminals with violent intent even further cements my feelings on the matter. In most jurisdictions these days, dispatchers are NOT cops and have NO AUTHORITY to order you to do something or not do it over the phone. Hell, for that matter, I don’t think a cop can absolutely tell you to do or not do something (as noted above with home invasions) when they are NOT ON THE SCENE and really do not know for certain what is going on at your location.
I have told any number of friends and family that if they find themselves in situations such as some of the victims of home invasions have been in, and a dispatcher is telling them to put the gun away and not to shoot someone who is forcing their way into their home, to by all means, disregard the dispatcher and do what YOU think is necessary for your own self-preservation. This is what I plan to do if so confronted.
I will try to find one or more of these recordings and post them here.
OK, where did my lengthy comment go, concerning how incompetent many (TOO MANY) dispatchers are and how even the cops they dispatch for regard most of them as idiots?
Here is another example of a dispatcher telling a citizen facing home invasion to not shoot. While in this case, the young man who fired, killing one of several home invaders, had already fired, the idea of a dispatcher at a remote location telling him NOT to shoot, long before police arrive, is a little scary. Also, this story blows holes in the idea that no one should ever leave a gun where a kid can access it. At his age and even younger, I had access to several loaded firearms in our home, to include my own S&W 6″ Model 10 (.38 special).
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/10553140/
You are trying to prove a point about dispatchers by using one incident that is unrelated to this case. Anecdotal and irrelevant.
I had a longer post which was on here and has totally disappeared. My point was to refute the comment by nitrat that dispatchers are somehow wise or that it is wise to follow whatever they tell you.
I noted how dispatchers are frequently the butt of many disdainful comments from the LEO’s who receive calls from them and other services. I noted how incompetence and being half-witted seem to be prerequisites for becoming a dispatcher in many departments or 911 centers. I acknowledged that there ARE good, competent, and intelligent dispatchers, but there are far TOO MANY of the kind who are not. I also posted other examples of dispatchers telling people not to shoot intruders, where the resident would likely have suffered grave bodily harm if they had complied with the dispatcher’s instructions.
Where are all of my damn comments going????????
I’m wondering if certain words set off spam filters or something, not sure.
I dunno man. Normally, we can do as we please on here. The comments I posted were not profane, unlike some of mine that stay up. This sucks. Sic needs to cancel his vacation and take it later on, when there isn’t so much shiite going on.
I’ve noticed several comments disappearing,although some of my obscenely disgusting ones get by.Go figure.Although,I’m reading the bible and trying to find the right woman;you,know-a big hairy woman,that looks just like a man with a great big dick…
This post is really beginning to suck(sometimes that’s good),and becoming quite tiresome
While I may not agree with all of your posts (and probably not all of anyone else’s, either), no one can accuse you of not adding atmosphere to this board. I haven’t laughed so hard in weeks as when you were telling about your encounters with another member of this board.
OH, …… ,HIM?
I need some rest after his 1st ,CBT session.Still waiting for the DVD’s from Disney-post production.
People are always getting into arguments w/strangers on blogs;nothing new,but you’re unusual.You have an open mind ,and don’t take things too seriously.That’s healthy,and the bottom line:Lib/Con,etc;we’re ‘only pawns in their game'(from the other ,Zimmerman;-)
Interesting factoid: George has a brother named Robert.
At least the new commenting system doesn’t hold comments any time you post links anymore, geeze that was annoying. Hopefully whatever it is gets resolved. :
If Zimmerman had decided to stay home, get drunk, and whale on his wife, TRAYVON WOULD STILL BE ALIVE!!
Just out of curiosity, since you’ve had so much experience with LE, why do you think the dispatcher told Z to stay in his vehicle?
Liability
Same reason that when me and a cop walked up to a door together, the cop moved over to the side and let me stand there in front of the door and knock – he wanted to stay safe and they wanted Zimmerman to do the same.
But, ole George proved yet again why he should never be a cop – not a lick o’ sense.
Right. It was for Zimmerman’s safety. The dispatcher was (correctly) assuming that the UNSUB (Martin) might be dangerous.
Somehow, many people seem to think the advice was given to protect Martin.
and whale on his wife
Is that a fat joke?
At what point did the dispatcher tell Zimmerman to stay in the car ? I have heard that hundreds of times from the Martin side of the case, but not once presented in evidence. What the dispatch told him was “We don’t need you to do that.” ( after he had gotten out of the car) at which point he started back to his car. Point out to me WHERE he was told by LE to stay in his car.
It’s illegal for police to use racial profiling,but not citizens?The jury was made up of six women.if it had been 12 jurors,this probably would have gone the other way.Too many laws need to be changed,if black people are to ever going to get a fair shake in America’s judicial system,and that’s not likely to happen,anytime soon.
Look at the case of John White, of Long Island New York:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/gov_paterson_commutes_sentence_of_2DuvTh7xB69DL06sfXzDoK
I was a child protective services worker for 13 years. I regularly called and was called by LE dispatch about going out on cases together. Dispatch facilitated our cooperation.
To try and convince me that dispatch does not operate the way that LE wants them to operate, indeed, acts as LE’s agent/representative to the community, amounts to ridiculous obfuscation.
I grew up with parents telling me if I ever had contact with LE, I was to say “yes, sir”, “no, sir” and follow their instructions. (I am 62 years old and white.)
Therefore, to expect me to come down on the side of the person who willfully, intentionally disregarded what the LE representative/dispatch told him to do just doesn’t fly.
I bet a lot of Zimmerman supporters grew up with parents telling them the same thing mine did about how to interact with LE. Those people need to seriously look at how and why they can now support the man who disregarded LE /dispatch instructions and ended up killing an unarmed person who would have never had the chance to injure him to the extent that he had to cover those scrapes/scratches with Band-Aids — Band-Aids — IF he had only listened to what LE/dispatch told him to do.
OK, where did my lengthy comment go, concerning how incompetent many (TOO MANY) dispatchers are and how even the cops they dispatch for regard most of them as idiots?
Here is another example of a dispatcher telling a citizen facing home invasion to not shoot. While in this case, the young man who fired, killing one of several home invaders, had already fired, the idea of a dispatcher at a remote location telling him NOT to shoot, long before police arrive, is a little scary. Also, this story blows holes in the idea that no one should ever leave a gun where a kid can access it. At his age and even younger, I had access to several loaded firearms in our home, to include my own S&W 6″ Model 10 (.38 special).
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/10553140/
You are trying to prove a point about dispatchers by using one incident that is unrelated to this case. Anecdotal and irrelevant.
Where are all of my damn comments going????????
I’m wondering if certain words set off spam filters or something, not sure.
I dunno man. Normally, we can do as we please on here. The comments I posted were not profane, unlike some of mine that stay up. This sucks. Sic needs to cancel his vacation and take it later on, when there isn’t so much shiite going on.
I’ve noticed several comments disappearing,although some of my obscenely disgusting ones get by.Go figure.Although,I’m reading the bible and trying to find the right woman;you,know-a big hairy woman,that looks just like a man with a great big dick…
This post is really beginning to suck(sometimes that’s good),and becoming quite tiresome
While I may not agree with all of your posts (and probably not all of anyone else’s, either), no one can accuse you of not adding atmosphere to this board. I haven’t laughed so hard in weeks as when you were telling about your encounters with another member of this board.
OH, …… ,HIM?
I need some rest after his 1st ,CBT session.Still waiting for the DVD’s from Disney-post production.
People are always getting into arguments w/strangers on blogs;nothing new,but you’re unusual.You have an open mind ,and don’t take things too seriously.That’s healthy,and the bottom line:Lib/Con,etc;we’re ‘only pawns in their game'(from the other ,Zimmerman;-)
Interesting factoid: George has a brother named Robert.
At least the new commenting system doesn’t hold comments any time you post links anymore, geeze that was annoying. Hopefully whatever it is gets resolved. :
If Zimmerman had decided to stay home, get drunk, and whale on his wife, TRAYVON WOULD STILL BE ALIVE!!
Just out of curiosity, since you’ve had so much experience with LE, why do you think the dispatcher told Z to stay in his vehicle?
Liability
Same reason that when me and a cop walked up to a door together, the cop moved over to the side and let me stand there in front of the door and knock – he wanted to stay safe and they wanted Zimmerman to do the same.
But, ole George proved yet again why he should never be a cop – not a lick o’ sense.
Right. It was for Zimmerman’s safety. The dispatcher was (correctly) assuming that the UNSUB (Martin) might be dangerous.
Somehow, many people seem to think the advice was given to protect Martin.
and whale on his wife
Is that a fat joke?
At what point did the dispatcher tell Zimmerman to stay in the car ? I have heard that hundreds of times from the Martin side of the case, but not once presented in evidence. What the dispatch told him was “We don’t need you to do that.” ( after he had gotten out of the car) at which point he started back to his car. Point out to me WHERE he was told by LE to stay in his car.
It’s illegal for police to use racial profiling,but not citizens?The jury was made up of six women.if it had been 12 jurors,this probably would have gone the other way.Too many laws need to be changed,if black people are to ever going to get a fair shake in America’s judicial system,and that’s not likely to happen,anytime soon.
Look at the case of John White, of Long Island New York:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/gov_paterson_commutes_sentence_of_2DuvTh7xB69DL06sfXzDoK
Your opinion in this article is twisted and wrong. You have ignored crucial testimony presented during the trial. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson welcome you to their clubhouse to join Nancy Grace. I suggested that you contribute to Fitsnews this week, but your article/opinion is so over the top that I must now put you on probation for 90 days at which time I will begin reading your contributions again.
LOL! I’m sure she cares.
Mrs. Lazenby gave his comments to her the same attention she would give a gnat that landed on the tip of her nose – just flicked it off and goes on with her thoughts.
How is it “over the top?”
Your opinion in this article is twisted and wrong. You have ignored crucial testimony presented during the trial. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson welcome you to their clubhouse to join Nancy Grace. I suggested that you contribute to Fitsnews this week, but your article/opinion is so over the top that I must now put you on probation for 90 days at which time I will begin reading your contributions again.
LOL! I’m sure she cares.
Mrs. Lazenby gave his comments to her the same attention she would give a gnat that landed on the tip of her nose – just flicked it off and goes on with her thoughts.
How is it “over the top?”
You had me until, “The problem is when our laws are crafted in such a way that the best way to ensure that you are not convicted of murder or manslaughter is to
make sure that your opponent ends up not just bested, but dead.” That’s a little hyperbolic. Obviously, the best way to ensure that you are not convicted of murder or manslaughter is to not kill anyone. No one says, “Well, I’ve kicked his ass, but I guess I’ll need to shoot him now so they can’t convict me of murder or manslaughter.” IMO “stand you ground” doesn’t encourage people to go around getting in confrontations so they can kill someone and it doesn’t encourage “finishing the job.” It’s just a potential out for someone who does either of those. I agree that it shouldn’t be a defense to someone who causes the confrontation without good cause. None existed in Zimmerman’s case but a poorly written law let him walk.
A dead man can’t testify that you weren’t acting in self defense.
You had me until, “The problem is when our laws are crafted in such a way that the best way to ensure that you are not convicted of murder or manslaughter is to
make sure that your opponent ends up not just bested, but dead.” That’s a little hyperbolic. Obviously, the best way to ensure that you are not convicted of murder or manslaughter is to not kill anyone. No one says, “Well, I’ve kicked his ass, but I guess I’ll need to shoot him now so they can’t convict me of murder or manslaughter.” IMO “stand you ground” doesn’t encourage people to go around getting in confrontations so they can kill someone and it doesn’t encourage “finishing the job.” It’s just a potential out for someone who does either of those. I agree that it shouldn’t be a defense to someone who causes the confrontation without good cause. None existed in Zimmerman’s case but a poorly written law let him walk.
A dead man can’t testify that you weren’t acting in self defense.
During my time at The Citadel we had an offense in the disciplinary code known as “Gross Poor Judgement”.Zimmerman was guilty of that ,but not the offense he was charged with.Both parties were at fault and this tragedy would have been averted had either Zimmerman or Martin used their heads and walked away.
With that being said, you will have same thing happen here as happened with OJ.Not guilty on the criminal charges, liable in the civil case.Kind of a “photographic negative” of the OJ situation.
Agreed!
During my time at The Citadel we had an offense in the disciplinary code known as “Gross Poor Judgement”.Zimmerman was guilty of that ,but not the offense he was charged with.Both parties were at fault and this tragedy would have been averted had either Zimmerman or Martin used their heads and walked away.
With that being said, you will have same thing happen here as happened with OJ.Not guilty on the criminal charges, liable in the civil case.Kind of a “photographic negative” of the OJ situation.
Agreed!
Another thing that’s amazing about the Zimmerman supporters is that their capacity for empathy appears to be only as deep as the most superficial level of human skin.
They empathize less with an unarmed high school kid walking through a neighborhood at night than they do with an armed ne’re do well wannabe cop who, along with his wife, lied to the court about how much money he was pulling in with a legal defense fund so he would be eligible for a public defender/court welfare.
That’s because they all secretly fantasize about shooting someone.
Another thing that’s amazing about the Zimmerman supporters is that their capacity for empathy appears to be only as deep as the most superficial level of human skin.
They empathize less with an unarmed high school kid walking through a neighborhood at night than they do with an armed ne’re do well wannabe cop who, along with his wife, lied to the court about how much money he was pulling in with a legal defense fund so he would be eligible for a public defender/court welfare.
People are at much more risk from people like Zimmerman.
That’s because they all secretly fantasize about shooting someone.
Please sign this:
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/open-a-civil-rights-case
I’d rather sign 9″. And that aint happenin’ :P
Is that a pen in your pocket or are you just glad to see BigT?
Please sign this:
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/open-a-civil-rights-case
I’d rather sign 9″. And that aint happenin’ :P
Is that a pen in your pocket or are you just glad to see BigT?
Good luck on changing the laws.
Virtually all of the “Stand Your Ground” state laws were written by ALEC — the American Legislative Exchange Council — and introduced and passed by the legislators who are on their “payroll”.
ALEC also wrote the core of Voter Photo ID bills that have been introduced in the past few years. Dozens of SC legislators attend the annual ALEC conferences, Nikki Haley included when she was in the House.
Thank God Almighty for ALEC. Any chance you can get me a link so I can get involved w/ Helping them…
When a With-Black Thug (w/ a record of crimes and drug use) jumps on a dude and beats the living H#!! out of him, I’m so glad ALEC made it legal for the poor guy getting beaten to defend himself…
Again: Thank you ALEC…and SC is glad you are helping our GOP Gov.
Thank God Almighty for ALEC.
I like Alec Baldwin too.
You like him more when he’s harshly abusing his wife and cussing his little girl…or when he’s violently attacking some poor-kid photog???
Wonder if the photog, or Alec’s little girl, thought about pulling a ‘Zimmerman’ on the hateful B@$*@*d…….
Exactly.And a six-juror trial? Overturned in 1970 by the Supreme Court.Libertarians like,Lazenby are fine with ideology,and protecting the freedoms they hold dear;pot smoking,no ‘government schools’,no affordable health care,etc,but this ‘trial’ emphasizes what a fascist society we’ve become.
So someone got away with murdering a black kid,for no reason?Just say,’ the laws must change’,and I’m a racist white chick.That covers it.BS.
Good luck on changing the laws.
Virtually all of the “Stand Your Ground” state laws were written by ALEC — the American Legislative Exchange Council — and introduced and passed by the legislators who are on their “payroll”.
ALEC also wrote the core of Voter Photo ID bills that have been introduced in the past few years. Dozens of SC legislators attend the annual ALEC conferences, Nikki Haley included when she was in the House.
Exactly.And a six-juror trial? Overturned in 1970 by the Supreme Court.Libertarians like,Lazenby are fine with ideology,and protecting the freedoms they hold dear;pot smoking,no ‘government schools’,no affordable health care,etc,but this ‘trial’ emphasizes what a fascist society we’ve become.
So someone got away with murdering a black kid,for no reason?Just say,’ the laws must change’,and I’m a racist white chick.That covers it.BS.
He had a judge and jury. Leave it alone. The system works.
Obviously, ask OJ. What did you think of the system then, “Tyrone”? Yeah, thought so.
He had a judge and jury. Leave it alone. The system works.
Obviously, ask OJ. What did you think of the system then, “Tyrone”? Yeah, thought so.
Just something to think about. Yeah, I know It’s not particularly relevant to the actual case….
Z testified that TM looked suspicious. No evidence has been presented that TM was not doing exactly what Z thought he was doing (casing homes and vehicles.) Stopping by the C-Store to buy mixer for Purple Drank doesn’t count — thieves eat and drink also.
Z was also initially portrayed as a racist. Subsequent investigation (including an FBI investigation — WTF?) indicates he is not.
Martin wasn’t on trial, except in the conservative media – he was killed. Thus, the lack of evidence presented. Also, good luck trying to prove a negative with your “no evidence that he was not doing” bit. Why the presumption of his guilt on your part? Also, the DOJ investigation is ongoing, so hold your horses there for a bit, Tonto.
Whoa, Nellie!
Not a presumption of guilt on my part. I will happily admit that Mr Martin could have been innocently walking back from the store. Either way it makes no difference in the case. The case revolved around two main points : who started the fight and whether Z was justified in using his gun. Even if you believe that Z stalked and attacked Martin and then shot him in cold blood–the testimony and evidence, obviously, presented reasonable doubt as to that.
I’m just trying to get some here to consider the possibility that Zimmerman’s suspicions were correct.
Just something to think about. Yeah, I know It’s not particularly relevant to the actual case….
Z testified that TM looked suspicious. No evidence has been presented that TM was not doing exactly what Z thought he was doing (casing homes and vehicles.) Stopping by the C-Store to buy mixer for Purple Drank doesn’t count — thieves eat and drink also.
Z was also initially portrayed as a racist. Subsequent investigation (including an FBI investigation — WTF?) indicates he is not.
Martin wasn’t on trial, except in the conservative media – he was killed. Thus, the lack of evidence presented. Also, good luck trying to prove a negative with your “no evidence that he was not doing” bit. Why the presumption of his guilt on your part? Also, the DOJ investigation is ongoing, so hold your horses there for a bit, Tonto.
Whoa, Nellie!
Not a presumption of guilt on my part. I will happily admit that Mr Martin could have been innocently walking back from the store. Either way it makes no difference in the case. The case revolved around two main points : who started the fight and whether Z was justified in using his gun. Even if you believe that Z stalked and attacked Martin and then shot him in cold blood–the testimony and evidence, obviously, presented reasonable doubt as to that.
I’m just trying to get some here to consider the possibility that Zimmerman’s suspicions were correct.
*Using third person out of RESPECT for “our founding editor*
You know, We call out BigT/GrandTango often… but we also give credit when it’s due. Although you’ve received many down votes today, we think you’ve made some good points. Carry on.
*Using third person out of RESPECT for “our founding editor”*
@GrandTango
You know, we often call you out, BigT/GrandTango … but we also give credit when it’s due. Although you’ve received many down votes today, we think you’ve made some good points. Carry on.
I am afraid of no man in the dark. Why? Because I am armed everywhere I go. No need to be afraid.
I am afraid of no man in the dark. Why? Because I am armed everywhere I go. No need to be afraid.
If anyone in the US was a product of a system that fostered and promoted minority rights, it was Tryavon. The civil rights laws were passed in the 1960s yet we still have a large bloc of blacks who won’t get on board the Opportunity Train. Trayvon should have known better. He did not need to be smoking weed. When I was his sage, I would have been at home reading a novel for school or writing a paper for class. Or watching TV .I worked my tail off in High School. I had parttime jobs. I kept busy and made a little spending money.
Look at the Mexicans and the Asians. These groups work like the devil to get ahead. No grass grown under their feet. I never feel threatened by either of these two groups. But I generally always feel uneasy when I see a black male or a group of them.
When will blacks begin to seize the opportunities available to them? What are they waiting for? The good life is not quick and easy. It takes work.
Good post! Over the years I have worked with more than a few blacks whose jobs or employment experience ranged from warehouse loading/unloading rail cars to office work and up. Many of them spoke of looking down on the blacks who were lazy or just didn’t care about having a job or a future. They only wanted acceptance and respect. As I think back on these men and women they were good examples of the type of people who are a credit to themselves, their families, and their communities.
If anyone in the US was a product of a system that fostered and promoted minority rights, it was Tryavon. The civil rights laws were passed in the 1960s yet we still have a large bloc of blacks who won’t get on board the Opportunity Train. Trayvon should have known better. He did not need to be smoking weed. When I was his sage, I would have been at home reading a novel for school or writing a paper for class. Or watching TV .I worked my tail off in High School. I had parttime jobs. I kept busy and made a little spending money.
Look at the Mexicans and the Asians. These groups work like the devil to get ahead. No grass grown under their feet. I never feel threatened by either of these two groups. But I generally always feel uneasy when I see a black male or a group of them.
When will blacks begin to seize the opportunities available to them? What are they waiting for? The good life is not quick and easy. It takes work.
Good post! Over the years I have worked with more than a few blacks whose jobs or employment experience ranged from warehouse loading/unloading rail cars to office work and up. Many of them spoke of looking down on the blacks who were lazy or just didn’t care about having a job or a future. They only wanted acceptance and respect. As I think back on these men and women they were good examples of the type of people who are a credit to themselves, their families, and their communities.
This is my response to the discussion I was having with sbuster1 – I wanted to start a separate comment chain so it wouldn’t get lost:
After a fight begins, regardless of who started it, the law allows each party to meet force with force. As Ken R said below, “once there is mutual combat both sides are acting lawfully and can defend themselves with deadly force.” The change I would like to see is for the initial aggressor – the person who pursued the other/started the fight – to be held accountable in some way.
Let’s remove the Zimmerman case from this for a moment (as difficult as that may be), andspeak only of the FL law – and many similar laws that exist in other states, actually, including SC.
As it stands now, an armed person can pursue an unarmed person who is acting lawfully, initiate a confrontation, and then shoot that person claiming self-defense. In order to avoid legal action, it is in the best interest of the aggressor to kill the person he pursued because a dead man cannot testify that the other person was not acting in self-defense. If there are no witnesses to the confrontation, that makes the situation
even easier for the initial aggressor. This flaw in the law allows you (speaking hypothetically), because you have a deep dislike or mistrust of me for some reason, to pursue and kill me without legal consequence. It also allows fights that rise to the level of deadly force when they didn’t have to (such as when one party has a weapon and the other does not) to occur without legal consequence.
That is not a law that I want to live under.
That’s a lie. At the moment you initiate a confrontation you are guilty of assault and therefore breaking the law. Most of these laws state clearly, in one form or another, NOT violating the law or acting lawfully.
Your entire premise is a lie.
No, it’s not. It’s why Zimmerman was acquitted.
No, No, No. You state clearly to set this case aside and look at a generic case where one person is known to instigate.
“…who is acting lawfully, initiate a confrontation, and then shoot that person claiming self-defense.”
You can not act lawfully and instigate a confrontation.
What I said was, “As it stands now, an armed person can pursue an unarmed person who is
acting lawfully, initiate a confrontation, and then shoot that person
claiming self-defense.”
I also said that if the other party is too dead to testify and there are no witnesses, then the first party can pursue someone (or instigate a confrontation, as you said) without legal consequence. You can easily pursue, instigate a fight, and kill someone without witnesses. In that situation, you are the only person alive to testify to what has happened, and you will say that you did it in self-defense. No one can show that you acted unlawfully because the only other “witness” is dead. And a jury must then find you not guilty under the law.
They are still breaking the law and the defense is not legal for them to use. You are still proposing an unlawful scenario on a lawful action by someone obeying the law. The law was instigated to protect the innocent, not the guilty.
Again, your entire premise is based on a lie.
This is my final comment to you, Frank, because I cannot make it any clearer. The defendant in my hypothetical will use a self-defense defense. He will do so because there is no one to testify that he wasn’t acting in self defense. It’s not right, but that’s what happens given the way the law is written, as I have explained above.
LIE
If in fact it is a self defense argument, the law does not speculate regarding self defense. That is on an individual basis that is allowed. Your original comments are ‘as the law as written’ which clearly is in reference to ‘Stand your ground’ legislation.
Curious is right. I was not illegal for Zimmerman (who was legally carrying his weapon) to follow Martin that night and ask him what he was doing there. That’s what you would contend, right? Maybe Martin felt threatened by this man following him in the dark and questioning him for no reason except that he was walking down the street and turned around and punched him and told him to back the fuck off (wouldn’t that be Martin standing his ground?). Maybe he turned to show the kid his concealed weapon, which he could easily unconceal by lifting up his shirt, and the kid felt threatened so he punched him. Maybe Zimmerman grabbed the kid’s shirt or arm first, starting the struggle. We don’t know both sides – we only know the side of the guy who survived because he shot the other guy. Regardless, once the fight started, the law let Zimmerman shoot Martin in self-defense.
No. I don’t contend anything. I’m responding to the post and then commenting on the post. Please read the post and then read my answer. Also read the note below. I am commenting on the scenario provided.
I agree’s that’s the kind of law we all want to live under and we can by not being drawn into a fight in the first place. But, no law will automatically change someones behavior. For instance, it’s illegal to drive under the influence but good people do it anyway and kill or maim other innocent people. If we all took responsibility for our actions without getting mad or all puffed up like both Martin and Z did we wouldn’t need the laws we have. Oh, to live in a perfect world.
I agree. In a perfect world all laws would apply to all people equally and everyone would accept responsibility for all of their actions.
Unfortunately this does not, and rarely does, happen enough. Therefore you get flawed laws by people with the absolute worst intentions in the world imposed upon those that are doing there damdest to simply stay alive.
Ah, but laws actually do change behavior. Remember the Civil Rights Act? That didn’t necessarily change minds, but it made certain behavior unlawful and prosecutable.
This is my response to the discussion I was having with sbuster1 – I wanted to start a separate comment chain so it wouldn’t get lost:
After a fight begins, regardless of who started it, the law allows each party to meet force with force. As Ken R said below, “once there is mutual combat both sides are acting lawfully and can defend themselves with deadly force.” The change I would like to see is for the initial aggressor – the person who pursued the other/started the fight – to be held accountable in some way.
Let’s remove the Zimmerman case from this for a moment (as difficult as that may be), andspeak only of the FL law – and many similar laws that exist in other states, actually, including SC.
As it stands now, an armed person can pursue an unarmed person who is acting lawfully, initiate a confrontation, and then shoot that person claiming self-defense. In order to avoid legal action, it is in the best interest of the aggressor to kill the person he pursued because a dead man cannot testify that the other person was not acting in self-defense. If there are no witnesses to the confrontation, that makes the situation
even easier for the initial aggressor. This flaw in the law allows you (speaking hypothetically), because you have a deep dislike or mistrust of me for some reason, to pursue and kill me without legal consequence. It also allows fights that rise to the level of deadly force when they didn’t have to (such as when one party has a weapon and the other does not) to occur without legal consequence.
That is not a law that I want to live under.
That’s a lie. At the moment you initiate a confrontation you are guilty of assault and therefore breaking the law. Most of these laws state clearly, in one form or another, NOT violating the law or acting lawfully.
Your entire premise is a lie.
No, it’s not. It’s why Zimmerman was acquitted.
No, No, No. You state clearly to set this case aside and look at a generic case where one person is known to instigate.
“…who is acting lawfully, initiate a confrontation, and then shoot that person claiming self-defense.”
You can not act lawfully and instigate a confrontation.
What I said was, “As it stands now, an armed person can pursue an unarmed person who is
acting lawfully, initiate a confrontation, and then shoot that person
claiming self-defense.”
I also said that if the other party is too dead to testify and there are no witnesses, then the first party can pursue someone (or instigate a confrontation, as you said) without legal consequence. You can easily pursue, instigate a fight, and kill someone without witnesses. In that situation, you are the only person alive to testify to what has happened, and you will say that you did it in self-defense. No one can show that you acted unlawfully because the only other “witness” is dead. And a jury must then find you not guilty under the law.
They are still breaking the law and the defense is not legal for them to use. You are still proposing an unlawful scenario on a lawful action by someone obeying the law. The law was instigated to protect the innocent, not the guilty.
Again, your entire premise is based on a lie.
This is my final comment to you, Frank, because I cannot make it any clearer. The defendant in my hypothetical will use a self-defense defense. He will do so because there is no one to testify that he wasn’t acting in self defense. It’s not right, but that’s what happens given the way the law is written, as I have explained above.
LIE
If in fact it is a self defense argument, the law does not speculate regarding self defense. That is on an individual basis that is allowed. Your original comments are ‘as the law as written’ which clearly is in reference to ‘Stand your ground’ legislation.
Curious is right. I was not illegal for Zimmerman (who was legally carrying his weapon) to follow Martin that night and ask him what he was doing there. That’s what you would contend, right? Maybe Martin felt threatened by this man following him in the dark and questioning him for no reason except that he was walking down the street and turned around and punched him and told him to back the fuck off (wouldn’t that be Martin standing his ground?). Maybe he turned to show the kid his concealed weapon, which he could easily unconceal by lifting up his shirt, and the kid felt threatened so he punched him. Maybe Zimmerman grabbed the kid’s shirt or arm first, starting the struggle. We don’t know both sides – we only know the side of the guy who survived because he shot the other guy. Regardless, once the fight started, the law let Zimmerman shoot Martin in self-defense.
No. I don’t contend anything. I’m responding to the post and then commenting on the post. Please read the post and then read my answer. Also read the note below. I am commenting on the scenario provided.
I agree’s that’s the kind of law we all want to live under and we can by not being drawn into a fight in the first place. But, no law will automatically change someones behavior. For instance, it’s illegal to drive under the influence but good people do it anyway and kill or maim other innocent people. If we all took responsibility for our actions without getting mad or all puffed up like both Martin and Z did we wouldn’t need the laws we have. Oh, to live in a perfect world.
I agree. In a perfect world all laws would apply to all people equally and everyone would accept responsibility for all of their actions.
Unfortunately this does not, and rarely does, happen enough. Therefore you get flawed laws by people with the absolute worst intentions in the world imposed upon those that are doing there damdest to simply stay alive.
Ah, but laws actually do change behavior. Remember the Civil Rights Act? That didn’t necessarily change minds, but it made certain behavior unlawful and prosecutable.
Point #1: There have, indeed, been riots, in Oakland and Los Angeles:
http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-protesters-raid-la-store-075210080.html
Point #2: The way the law is “crafted” has nothing to do with the decision any jury can make. In a recent case in Texas, Raul Rodriguez was found guilty and sentenced to 40 years, despite his claim to “standing his ground.” I think ‘stand your ground’ legislation has been a major step in taking back our streets – to say nothing of our lives – from young thugs, bullies, and petty criminals, which the court system has been coddling for decades.
While the power of a jury in finding someone not guilty is absolute, many judges abuse their power by handing out token sentences in instances where a jury has determined that someone is guilty of crime, and the judge has a bleeding heart. But that’s neither here nor there.
From what we know (and we’re NOT a jury, and have NOT seen the evidence the real jury was presented), Zimmerman was acting stupidly, but so was Martin. It seems he started the physical assault instead of just walking away, as he should have. Immature? Just a child? So, what is the “magic” age when a young man becomes a man, becomes mature? Is it 18? 21? 30? At what age does he become responsible for his own actions? At 17, he would be adjudged an adult and responsible for his actions in most states. His past police record (and he DID have one), as far as I know, was not presented as evidence, nor were his cell phone records, which allegedly demonstrated his penchant for violence. “Skittleboy Obamason” was no innocent babe as so many have tried to portray him.
I find it interesting that Zimmerman was not initially charged, and only charged after political (read, Liberal) pressure was brought to bear. I also find it interesting that he was charged with only murder and manslaughter, neither of which he could be legally found guilty, and not with negligent homicide, or criminally negligent homicide, of which there was a remote chance that he could be found guilty of one. Perhaps the greater charges were intentionally applied, with the knowledge that a guilty verdict was highly improbable.
I am also absolutely disgusted with the racist Liberal media’s treatment of Zimmerman, who was constantly identified as “Zimmerman, who identifies himself as Hispanic.” Why not just “Hispanic”? Is Obama identified as “Obama, who identifies himself as African-American”? Why not? Thus, the “race baiting” has been displayed as much by the news media just as much as “social media”. The Federal government quasi-Nuremberg laws do, indeed, recognize ‘Hispanic’ as a race or ethnicity. One has on to look at Box 8 of the National Voter Registration Form to see that.
Yes, the courts have been coddling criminals for decades. That’s why we have the highest percentage of our population incarcerated of any country in the industrialized world, including China. Genius analysis.
Point #1: There have, indeed, been riots, in Oakland and Los Angeles:
http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-protesters-raid-la-store-075210080.html
Point #2: The way the law is “crafted” has nothing to do with the decision any jury can make. In a recent case in Texas, Raul Rodriguez was found guilty and sentenced to 40 years, despite his claim to “standing his ground.” I think ‘stand your ground’ legislation has been a major step in taking back our streets – to say nothing of our lives – from young thugs, bullies, and petty criminals, which the court system has been coddling for decades.
While the power of a jury in finding someone not guilty is absolute, many judges abuse their power by handing out token sentences in instances where a jury has determined that someone is guilty of crime, and the judge has a bleeding heart. But that’s neither here nor there.
From what we know (and we’re NOT a jury, and have NOT seen the evidence the real jury was presented), Zimmerman was acting stupidly, but so was Martin. It seems he started the physical assault instead of just walking away, as he should have. Immature? Just a child? So, what is the “magic” age when a young man becomes a man, becomes mature? Is it 18? 21? 30? At what age does he become responsible for his own actions? At 17, he would be adjudged an adult and responsible for his actions in most states. His past police record (and he DID have one), as far as I know, was not presented as evidence, nor were his cell phone records, which allegedly demonstrated his penchant for violence. “Skittleboy Obamason” was no innocent babe as so many have tried to portray him.
I find it interesting that Zimmerman was not initially charged, and only charged after political (read, Liberal) pressure was brought to bear. I also find it interesting that he was charged with only murder and manslaughter, neither of which he could be legally found guilty, and not with negligent homicide, or criminally negligent homicide, of which there was a remote chance that he could be found guilty of one. Perhaps the greater charges were intentionally applied, with the knowledge that a guilty verdict was highly improbable.
I am also absolutely disgusted with the racist Liberal media’s treatment of Zimmerman, who was constantly identified as “Zimmerman, who identifies himself as Hispanic.” Why not just “Hispanic”? Is Obama identified as “Obama, who identifies himself as African-American”? Why not? Thus, the “race baiting” has been displayed as much by the news media just as much as “social media”. The Federal government quasi-Nuremberg laws do, indeed, recognize ‘Hispanic’ as a race or ethnicity. One has on to look at Box 8 of the National Voter Registration Form to see that.
Yes, the courts have been coddling criminals for decades. That’s why we have the highest percentage of our population incarcerated of any country in the industrialized world, including China. Genius analysis.
I totally agree with you Amy. While I really have no bias on any nationality,and I work with many, I find so many people that I work with profiling others because of where they are from, the way they look( We have girls from other countries that look Oriental but they are from the Russian areas) and they love me and really get upset at the way a few treat them, because they don’t speak good English. They want to learn and are open to everything…
So you’re perfect and everyone else is a racist? Just asking?
I totally agree with you Amy. While I really have no bias on any nationality,and I work with many, I find so many people that I work with profiling others because of where they are from, the way they look( We have girls from other countries that look Oriental but they are from the Russian areas) and they love me and really get upset at the way a few treat them, because they don’t speak good English. They want to learn and are open to everything…
So you’re perfect and everyone else is a racist? Just asking?
OMG: OmG OMG….Rush is reporting that rachel jeantel said Trayvon went MMA on Zimmerman because Zimmerman was GAY (Trayvon thought)….
‘Creepy @$$ Cracker’ was describing Zimmerman as a Gay Rapist Pervert…
“Hide Yo’ wife, Hide Yo’ Kids, Hide Ya husband too…they rapin’ er’body up in here”…Hahahahahaha….
LMAO…you Dumb@$$#$,….I know you will IGNORE this BLOCKBUSTER, Earth-Changing News…..
But if you peope were not STUPID, you’d be invisible…LMAO…OMG…you FREAKIN Dolts….This is HILARIOUS….Hahahahha….
Can’t wai t to hear Lizenby’s EXPERT analysis of Homophone attacks Gay….but I won’t hold my breath…
You Keystone Cops and A car full of Crowns all in one…LMAO!!!!!
Dude, how many times are you going to post that same comment on multiple articles today? Do you ever just calm down?
How bout get it and post it 100-fold for me, dumb@$$..This is MAN BITES DOG and you STUPID Some-Beeches will try to ignore it…
How Bout that…Trayvon was a HomoPhobe. Thought Zimmerman was a Creepy-@$$ Cracker Punk…Don’t yall HATE Homophobes…???…LMAO…
What a dilemma if you’e a leftwing NUTJOB Racist (not really)…Hhahahahahaha…
I’d like to dedicate this song (click link below) to all you leftwing nutjob, Zimmerman-phobes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtZfW2z9dw
Hide yo’ wife, hide’ you kids..hide ya husband too…Hahahahaha….
These ‘stand your ground’ laws, which go way beyond what was tolerated in the Wild West, need to go.
Stevie Wonder’s boycott of Florida and other states with these laws, including ours, is a great beginning.
A more powerful boycott would involve mothers telling their athlete sons and daughters – black, white, brown – that they will not allow them to accept any scholarship to any college in any state with an ALEC ‘stand your ground’ law.
Professional athletes should put the teams they are on in ALEC ‘stand your ground’ states that when their contracts are up, they will be gone.
Entertainers need to do like Stevie and avoid concerts in ALEC ‘stand your ground’ states.
I think that as ignorant as most voters are of what their legislators are doing that many have no idea that they even live in ALEC ‘stand your ground’ states.
Having high profile entertainers, sport and otherwise, point that out may be the only way actual voters can grab their legislatures back from the people with the money.
ALEC = American Legislative Exchange Council. They write template laws for state legislators who care more about “national” issues than the state they are supposed to be looking out for.
Wrong.
Morons look to entertainers as a legitimate source of legal advice.
Of course I always take the advice of steroid/drugged up kids making millions of dollars playing a childs game (that occasionally wack people because they can).
I’m not particularly fond of my mother either. That said, how the hell is a parent of a grown person, someone who is supposed to be making their own decisions in life, going to impact whether or not someone gets a scholarship or grant. I thought the recipient got there on their own merits?
Yeah: more than 70% of babies born to back women are abondened by the sperm donor…, and this is with cushy-life, polished white ladies like Lizenby cajoling them to Abort, because their babies ain’t good enough to be born…(Margret Sanger is likely high-fiving the Devil and Hitler over the guilty pop-culture abortion lovers, like Lizenby and Obama)….
And your ignorant @$$ is blaming ALEC…You are one Stupid son-of-a-B!*#h..and the Black community is suffering and paying w/ its soul for listening to ignornat F*#k$ like you….
These ‘stand your ground’ laws, which go way beyond what was tolerated in the Wild West, need to go.
Stevie Wonder’s boycott of Florida and other states with these laws, including ours, is a great beginning.
A more powerful boycott would involve mothers telling their athlete sons and daughters – black, white, brown – that they will not allow them to accept any scholarship to any college in any state with an ALEC ‘stand your ground’ law.
Professional athletes should put the teams they are on in ALEC ‘stand your ground’ states that when their contracts are up, they will be gone.
Entertainers need to do like Stevie and avoid concerts in ALEC ‘stand your ground’ states.
I think that as ignorant as most voters are of what their legislators are doing that many have no idea that they even live in ALEC ‘stand your ground’ states.
Having high profile entertainers, sport and otherwise, point that out may be the only way actual voters can grab their legislatures back from the people with the money.
ALEC = American Legislative Exchange Council. They write template laws for state legislators who care more about “national” issues than the state they are supposed to be looking out for.
Wrong.
Morons look to entertainers as a legitimate source of legal advice.
Of course I always take the advice of steroid/drugged up kids making millions of dollars playing a childs game (that occasionally wack people because they can).
I’m not particularly fond of my mother either. That said, how the hell is a parent of a grown person, someone who is supposed to be making their own decisions in life, going to impact whether or not someone gets a scholarship or grant. I thought the recipient got there on their own merits?
Gawd…I don’t know if I’ve EVER seen Liberal Nutjobs look so stupid, as they do on this one…We really need to support Antoine Dobson…but you hateful Bigots are SILENT…LMAO….
Again….I’d like to dedicate this song (click link below) to all you leftwing nutjob, Zimmerman-phobes..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
Hide yo’ wife, hide’ you kids..hide ya husband too…Hahahahaha….
So change the laws to where if you are assaulted you have no right to self defense? If Zimmerman was a cop this would have raised no question much less a trial.
Thank you. Without an neutral eye-witness account, it’s one word -vs-… Well, it’s GZ’s word. And according to him, he was accosted first and responded accordingly. There wasn’t a racial motive; GZ was simply looking out for his community. Could he have acted more responsibly? Yes, of course. But it’s much easier to Monday morning QB the situation than it is to be physically assailed in the dark and pick the best strategy. In darkness, GZ had no way of knowing TM was still technically, not yet a man. Thank God the jury saw it for what it was. An altercation, started by GZ, amped up by TM and finished by GZ.
So change the laws to where if you are assaulted you have no right to self defense? If Zimmerman was a cop this would have raised no question much less a trial.
Thank you. Without an neutral eye-witness account, it’s one word -vs-… Well, it’s GZ’s word. And according to him, he was accosted first and responded accordingly. There wasn’t a racial motive; GZ was simply looking out for his community. Could he have acted more responsibly? Yes, of course. But it’s much easier to Monday morning QB the situation than it is to be physically assailed in the dark and pick the best strategy. In darkness, GZ had no way of knowing TM was still technically, not yet a man. Thank God the jury saw it for what it was. An altercation, started by GZ, amped up by TM and finished by GZ.
Rachel Jeantel has announced that she wants a career in law enforcement. My guess is she will be a 911 dispatcher.
Dispatcher: “911, what’s uhh, yo emergencies?”
Caller: “Ma’am, please send help. There’s a man trying to break into my…”
Dispatcher: “Iz he’s a cracka ass cracka?? Aint nobody got no time for that…”
Click…
Rachel: First of of all lady. Is he a punk???…Because if he is…he gone get bash…you know, like da Bloods…
Dey snatchin ‘ yo people up….
We gone find you. We gone find you…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
LMAO….
Rachel Jeantel has announced that she wants a career in law enforcement. My guess is she will be a 911 dispatcher.
Dispatcher: “911, what’s uhh, yo emergencies?”
Caller: “Ma’am, please send help. There’s a man trying to break into my…”
Dispatcher: “Iz he’s a cracka ass cracka?? Aint nobody got no time for that…”
Click…
Here’s an interesting article about how Florida blacks benefit disproportionately from the ‘stand your ground ;aw’ — this is amazing:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/
Interesting information
Maybe Florida should drop their “stand your ground statute” and adopt the Randolph Plea, aka Twinkie Defense in Reverse
If one doesn’t want to pay their bill or behave in an appropriate manner, then just raise hell, resist arrest and plea low blood sugar
Just another reason why I would rather kiss a bobcat’s ass than to venture into the City of Columbia
http://www.thestate.com/2013/07/16/2865170/sc-naacp-chief-arrested-after.html
Premium. That was funny as hell.
Maybe he has diabetes, but honestly my first response/thought was he was trying to get shot so he could start bitching about that flag crap again. Get himself back in the limelight.
“City manager Teresa Wilson also was informed and went to the business. Santiago said he was not at the dry cleaners.
Wilson said she was in the vicinity of Five Points when she learned of the incident with Randolph. “It is not uncommon, when I deem it necessary, to go on scene. Actually, it is my responsibility to do so based on the circumstances.”
Yeah, right! Stinks of special privileges.
Be willing to betcha all the wings you can eat and all the beer you can drink if the Black Bitch got a call that Moe Baddourah was being pistol whipped in front of City Hall, she would do a 3.8 forty out of her private office, jump into her private elevator to her private parking spot, get in her City paid for Cadillac Escalade and be over the Gervais Street Bridge before Moe’s body hit the concrete
Seems like someone other than Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse knows how to fuck the white man and the horse he rode in on
Here’s an interesting article about how Florida blacks benefit disproportionately from the ‘stand your ground ;aw’ — this is amazing:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/
Maybe
Premium. That was funny as hell.
Maybe he has diabetes, but honestly my first response/thought was he was trying to get shot so he could start bitching about that flag crap again. Get himself back in the limelight.
“City manager Teresa Wilson also was informed and went to the business. Santiago said he was not at the dry cleaners.
Wilson said she was in the vicinity of Five Points when she learned of the incident with Randolph. “It is not uncommon, when I deem it necessary, to go on scene. Actually, it is my responsibility to do so based on the circumstances.”
Yeah, right! Stinks of special privileges.
Be
Ashy Larry had a different version of what happened w/ the stalker in the projects…
It may fit even better than Antoine’s video..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXjBIu1GPm8
STUPID CRAP!
How can you call it that? Can you understand the words? He must be singing in creole because I can’t understand him.
But you swear Rachel Jeantel is an honor student…that figures….
She said she has a 3.0 average, but refused to say in which classes. She has proved to me that she has earned a 4.0 in “Lying and Deception”. Even after the trial is over she continues to change her stories!
And Rachel is their STAR witness. She TOTALLY represents the intelligence of the liberal party…
Rachel’s the best they have…and they are marching in the streets, full of hatred. All based on their belief in her..and the rest of the garbage liberals are fed, so they can be controlled…
The Urban Dictionary now has a special section for Racheal Jeantel. There are two sections headed [1] racist/non-racist words to be used by blacks only and [2] – well, all words said by non-blacks are racist.
Yet…Lizenby: A loud and common liberal voice…ignores their best and brightest (Rachel)…except for what they WANT to hear…
The Urban Dictionary now has a special section for Racheal Jeantel. There are two sections headed [1] racist/non-racist words to be used by blacks only and [2] – well, all words said by non-blacks are racist.
Trayvon Martin, aka “The Purest Angel in Florida, after being suspended from school AGAIN is truly a victim of his society and circumstances. Momma didn’t want him in her home; Daddy didn’t want him in his home; one can only speculate about the true reasons. His special friend Rachel’s mom could have offered him refuge so he wouldn’t have to be so far away from family and friends. So far I haven’t read or heard any explanations – if there is any. It wouldn’t even surprise me if the condo association sued for the return of the $1.2 million. Sadness for so many people from this incident.
He was staying with his father and his father’s fiance in the home owned by his father’s fiance at the time of the incident. That home was in the same community in which Zimmerman lived. That has been widely reported, so I’m not sure what you’re reading if you didn’t know that. Yes, he was suspended from school for a week at the time b/c he was in possession of marijuana, a fact that his family has never disputed. Plenty of teens experiment with MJ. That’s irrelevant to this case. And the parents who didn’t want him in their homes? Both have been involved from the beginning – his father called the police when he didn’t come home. The police never thought to look for his parents while his body lay in the morgue unidentified. So there’s your explanation – all of which has been widely reported, repeatedly, for over a year.
Did not know his father was living with his girlfriend.
Trayvon’s parents were divorced. Trayvon’s father was living with his fiance. All over the news.
Trayvon Martin, aka “The Purest Angel in Florida, after being suspended from school AGAIN is truly a victim of his society and circumstances. Momma didn’t want him in her home; Daddy didn’t want him in his home; one can only speculate about the true reasons. His special friend Rachel’s mom could have offered him refuge so he wouldn’t have to be so far away from family and friends. So far I haven’t read or heard any explanations – if there is any. It wouldn’t even surprise me if the condo association sued for the return of the $1.2 million. Sadness for so many people from this incident.
He was staying with his father and his father’s fiance in the home owned by his father’s fiance at the time of the incident. That home was in the same community in which Zimmerman lived. That has been widely reported, so I’m not sure what you’re reading if you didn’t know that. Yes, he was suspended from school for a week at the time b/c he was in possession of marijuana, a fact that his family has never disputed. Plenty of teens experiment with MJ. That’s irrelevant to this case. And the parents who didn’t want him in their homes? Both have been involved from the beginning – his father called the police when he didn’t come home. The police never thought to look for his parents while his body lay in the morgue unidentified. So there’s your explanation – all of which has been widely reported, repeatedly, for over a year.
Did not know his father was living with his girlfriend.
Trayvon’s parents were divorced. Trayvon’s father was living with his fiance. All over the news.
Justice was served the evening Trayvon got his ass capped. Had a back with stolen jewelry and drug residue. Happened on the evening of his suspension from schrool for the above.
The world is a better place and we need more George Zimmermans in this world!! If we did, perhaps Hunnewell and Carter strange would not have been murdered or beaten and left for dead!!
Justice was served the evening Trayvon got his ass capped. Had a back with stolen jewelry and drug residue. Happened on the evening of his suspension from schrool for the above.
The world is a better place and we need more George Zimmermans in this world!! If we did, perhaps Hunnewell and Carter strange would not have been murdered or beaten and left for dead!!