Posted on 03/25/2012 3:33:02 PM PDT by SaveOurRepublicFromTyranny
This news goes largely unreported, as race-hustling vultures, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, swoop onto the scene to exploit the tragic shooting for personal publicity and political gain, appointing themselves as judge and jury in the Trayvon Martin shooting case. President Obama is promoting a race war by inferring that Martin was practically his own son: "If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon." He might as well as said, "When you kill Trayvon, you've killed my own son. If you support me, retaliate!"
(Excerpt) Read more at myfreedompost.com ...
“If I had son he’d look like Treyvon’’. What, he’d be dead?
I never said murder was committed, only that its unfortunate from many angles and that I do not agree with Zimmerman following him. I believe it made the situation worse.
You have the most reasoned replies I’ve seen regarding this issue. I agree with your assessment of the entire situation.
More disinformation from canuckistan. As another poster showed supported by evidence, the encounter was far from Zimmerman’s truck. There is a national association of Neighbourhood Watch organization with its rules, code of conduct and so on. Zimmerman did not register his, did not follow any code of conduct except his. Proof he didn’t register comes from the interviews with the association. It’s good to keep oneself informed. Mr Zimmerman’s code of conduct wa agressive and presumptous. An experienced policeman, at least in this country, identifies himself and attempts to engage the suspect with a friendly conversation. The suspect has already been rendered harmless by knowing he’s being watched. D’uh to you and the clueless George who confronted Martin. Wow, what a technique!
A strange adult slings (baseless) accusations at a teenager, then gets out and follows him, I’m sure the kid was baseline in terms of nerves. Zimmerman didn’t simply exit the vehicle, he exited and followed him. How could he return to the vehicle, if he didn’t actually pursue the kid. And following at a safe distance is pursuing, you’re arguing over symantics.
Well, I can help you out with a few factual corrections to your account below.
A neighborhood watch volunteer witnesses a 17 year old black male walking down the street, witnesses no crime but still calls 911.
He did not call 911. He called the police non-emergency number.
Neighborhood Watch volunteers are NEVER supposed to tail or confront suspects, under any circumstances. The 911 operator tells Zimmerman “we don’t need you to follow him”, but Zimmerman does anyway. At some point after following Martin, Zimmerman then exits the vehicle and confronts him (at least verbally, and it is possible a weapon was displayed, no one knows).
We do not know that he followed Martin. After saying "okay" to the operator he remained on the phone for almost two more minutes, and stated that he did not know where "this kid" went. We certainly know that he was outside his car several minutes after the call, presumably trying to spot Martin again to see where he had gone. Neighborhood watchers are supposed to try to observe from a safe distance, and there is no evidence he tried to do anything else.
This is the same Zimmerman who called 911 almost 50 times over the previous year, and that is relevant as it should give an idea of his mindstate.
No, he didn't. He called police, most of the calls to the non-emergency number, 44 times in the last eight years. This has been widely mis-reported, but the call records are all online.
No one knows what happens next and it is quite possible Martin initiated the physical confrontation that the witness saw.
That is certainly possible. It is also possible that Martin initiated the confrontation. His girlfriend's account is that the conversation began with Martin asking "What are you following me for?" Is it not also plausible that when he said this, Zimmerman was surprised to come face to face with him?
Would anyone here (much less a high school kid) not be on edge and spooked after being followed in a vehicle and then approached by an unknown adult male?
Well, you know, I've thought a lot about that, and as much as we all want Zimmerman to be more reasonable in his actions, I'd like you to think about this: 1) Martin did not live in that neighborhood. He was a guest. 2) He first saw Zimmerman inside the neighborhood, which is gated, in a vehicle. The reasonable assumption is that Zimmerman lived there. 3) There were Neighborhood Watch signs posted at the entrance. 4) Martin's girlfriend reports that Zimmerman asked "What are you doing here?"
At this point, shouldn't it be quite clear to any reasonable person what was going on? Wouldn't the conversation be easily and peacefully ended by simply saying "I am visiting my dad in that house over there."
I don't think we are making any wild assumptions by concluding that he never said that. None of this, of course, proves that Martin was the aggressor. It only proves we don't know. We also know that "following" is not a crime, and neither is asking a question, and I think we have to concede the possibility at least, that Martin showed some poor judgment. That doesn't mean he deserved to die, and it also isn't blaming the victim.
It is also quite possible that the weapon was not displayed until Zimmerman was scared for his life and getting hit.
Yes, I kind of doubt that it was, since Zimmerman was screaming for help for at least 45 seconds before shooting.
But make no mistake, Zimmerman saw no crime committed and went out looking for trouble by following this kid out of his driveway.
That is wild speculation which is not supported by any of the facts. I want you to consider a couple more facts, because they have been bothering me a bit.
Zimmerman first spotted Martin around the clubhouse. At a normal walking pace, that is about three minutes from the house Martin was staying at. Zimmerman was on the phone for just over four minutes. He could have been inside his house before Zimmerman hung up the phone. It was no more than three minutes after that that phone call ended that Martin was shot. Yet the shooting took place only about 200 feet from where Zimmerman parked his car while on the phone with police.
I keep reading these speculations about some "pursuit" or "chase" and accounts of Martin "running," but somehow, after seven minutes of running, he ended up in almost the exact spot where Zimmerman had lost sight of him while still on the phone with police.
I'm not trying to prove anything here - but those times and locations are facts, and I am just trying to make sense of them.
It was a case of extreme stupidity and it also was a case of him profiling an innocent kid who had committed no crime. What a mess this is, and it’s a shame that someone ended up dead. It is also a shame that this will be used for political motives, as it already has.
Well, I don't think it's nearly as cut and dried as you seem to think, but I certainly agree it is a shame and a tragedy all the way around.
lol...
“More disinformation from canuckistan. As another poster showed supported by evidence, the encounter was far from Zimmerman’s truck.”
I never said Martin attacked Zimmerman at the truck. I speculated Martin may have attacked Zimmerman on the way back to Zimmerman’s truck. Learn to read.
“There is a national association of Neighbourhood Watch organization with its rules, code of conduct and so on. Zimmerman did not register his, did not follow any code of conduct except his. Proof he didn’t register comes from the interviews with the association.”
Proof?
“Mr Zimmerman’s code of conduct wa agressive and presumptous.”
In your opinion. Again no crime.
“An experienced policeman, at least in this country, identifies himself and attempts to engage the suspect with a friendly conversation.”
Your point? Are we at the point where you prove a crime was committed yet? Btw Martin was running. How was Zimmerman supposed to engage him in conversation?
“D’uh to you and the clueless George who confronted Martin. Wow, what a technique!”
Duh to you for continuing to speculate and accuse with no proof. Nobody said Zimmerman’s actions or technique were perfect. Only that there is no proof he did anything criminal.
For Martin to know that there were accusations being slung, I guess he must have tapped the phone call, huh?
And following at a safe distance is pursuing, you’re arguing over symantics.
Pursuit indicates an attempt to overtake something. Following indicates observation at a distance. A fighter jet in pursuit of an enemy plane is different than just following him. If those words don't mean different things to you, then I'd suppose you'll agree to stop saying "pursue" and just say "follow" instead in talking about this case.
You have to win, don’t you? I don’t. A simple Google search will find you an article which recalls an interview with a national neighbourhood watch organization spokesman who says that Zimmerman’s watch was never registered. Google has your proof.
A some point they met, and Zimmerman asked aggressively, as we know: “What are you doing here?” What would you answer? I can guess what Martin said: “Who the eff are you to axe, faggot?!”
That’s where Zimmerman should have identified himself (or even before) and started a friendly conversation. He was, as his 911 call shows, paranoid, prejudicial and presumptuous.
First rule: identify yourself. (Go ahead, judge, tell me again it’s not illegal NOT to identify yourself!)
A young black guy stalked, as he clearly was, by a white or almost white guy, is likely to assume that he is being stalked by a fag on a prowl, believe me! There is a particular distaste for homosexuals among young black males. All of it is conjecture (before you accuse me of fantasies.)
You should NB that the photo you’ve posted has been altered.
Look at the jaw line on the lower right (subjects left jawline). Look at the black background behind it. See how the line is crisp and has a very high contrast vs. the black background? It’s been altered, without doubt.
See how uniform the facial grey tone is? Again, this is evidence of alteration.
“You have to win, don’t you? I don’t. A simple Google search will find you an article which recalls an interview with a national neighbourhood watch organization spokesman who says that Zimmerman’s watch was never registered. Google has your proof.”
Is that the applicable organization, or are there others? Was Zimmerman, or the community association required to register with them? I’m asking. I don’t know.
I agree with you the entire situation was handled poorly. I do not see any evidence of criminal behavior (from what is available so far).
All of it is not conjecture. The evidence available to date backs Zimmerman’s story up. If it didn’t he would have been arrested that night.
I think we agree more than we disagree. Which is what I wanted to post immediately following my response. Sorry, if I was rude.
Needless to say, the registration in the national organization is not required for anything, except some official identification, and whatever else, I don’t know. But such organizations do provide guidance, code of conduct rules, and perhaps some badges to wear. Research to make.
Yes, everything beyond the police report, which I read, and the witnesses statements is conjecture.
If there are no witnesses, how do you know Martin was innocent and minding his own business?
You're doing nothing BUT posting race-baiting speculation utterly at odds with known facts.
Once BOTH Martin (to his girlfriend) AND Zimmerman (to the cops as he turned and went back to his car) reported Martin ran away and "lost" Zimmerman - that's the END of it.
Zimmerman, at that point, did NOT know where Martin was.
But Martin knew where Zimmerman was.
So Martin is the ONLY ONE who could have instigated the assault, because he was the ONLY ONE who could have COME BACK.
So Martin went looking for a fight, and got one. And as Zimmerman was armed with a gun but ended up on the ground with a broken nose calling for help, it stands to reason he was jumped by Martin, because OTHERWISE HE WOULD HAVE HAD HIS GUN OUT.
But he didn't. So he was jumped by Martin unexpectedly, and fired in self-defense of his life.
Case closed.
I’m sorry if I was rude as well cat. I don’t mean to be so forceful about this. I just get angry because there are some people posting the same questions/accusations over and over. It’s almost like they’re trying to agitate instead of getting to the bottom of things. I don’t know who initiated what, but I do know that the statements, reports and physical evidence to date do not indicate Zimmerman committed a crime. Incredibly poor judgement? Overzealousness? Yes. Crime? No.
This is just a tragedy in my opinion.
This is tragedy and a misjudgment on the part of both principals, each a prejudiced hothead, I suspect.
Prejudiced by forces of the surrounding culture, which few of us can see, evaluate and resist, and that only part of the time.
“Zimmerman said Martin looked straight at him. It’s in the 911 call.”
How far apart were they at the time?
“Then when Martin tries to defend himself from the stalker he gets shot.”
Liar. That is NOT what has been reported.
I have not said that Zimmerman surreptitiously followed Martin home ~ but that piece occurs some time into the journey ~ so you could say surreptitiously.
Like I've been pointing out ~ much to the distress of a number of Freepers who want them to make sure Zimmerman is left alone ~ the simplest story here is Zimmerman follows (or tracks) Martin. Zimmerman shoots Martin.
I think some people imagine that it was Martin who followed Zimmerman. And Martin who shot Zimmerman. ~ they should pay some attention.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.