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 ...
Bring it on, it’s going to happen sooner or later, if not for this, it will be for something else.
Your double secret witness JOHN said he’d help ~ so help was on the way. No more need to shoot anybody.
Wearing a hoodie indoors, yeah that makes a lot of sense. /s
Correct.
My small town, tight knit neighborhood doesn't have an organized watch. Everyone watches, though. It is called "good citizenship".
Believe me... we know who "belongs" in our neighborhood, and it has nothing to do with race because we have white and black families living here. Anyone who does not belong here will be watched as they pass through. Anyone who does not belong here will be asked what their business is here if they loiter. If they have a problem with that, THEY need to dial 911.
Strange. We don't have any crime in my neighborhood.
Zimmerman said Martin looked straight at him. It’s in the 911 call.
Okay, so let’s say he had a reason to call 911 as he was being safe. I would say that based on the fact that he was innocent, Martin had a reason to be on edge having accusations thrown his way. Can you name one good and solid reason for Zimmerman to chase after him? That, more then any other fact in this case, is what turned this into a tragedy. It likely caused Martin to feel like he was in danger, if he sits in his car or goes inside, none of this happens. Zimmerman witnessed no crime being committed, I could feel empathetic if he watched the kid hop out of someone’s window.
The transcripts of the calls to the police department are documentation as well as anything else made public by the police. My aggravation is when people completely ignore the documentation that actually IS out there and think they can just make up their own facts.
All that being said. What are your predictions on this case?
I think the authorities will come to the same conclusion they did the night of the shooting. I'm not aware of any actual evidence that runs counter to what they had at that time.
Zimmerman reported to dispatch that Martin was behaving suspiciously (read the transcript).
While I would have remained in the vehicle, Zimmerman chose not too. He was perfectly within his rights.
Initiated the entire episode? It’s a chain of events. Each individual step in the chain can alter culpability. Is the salesman of a hammer legally culpable if the person who bought it bashes someone on the head with it? Afterall, he started the entire episode. Remedial logic. Look into it.
If indeed Zimmerman lost Martin (as the transcript of the phone call shows, and is backed up by Martin telling his girlfriend that he’s lost Zimmerman) then how does Zimmerman initiate violence?
It seems very likely that Martin did assault Martin on his way back to his truck (which of course negates your claim that Martin felt threatened).
Finally, the burden of proof would not be on Zimmerman to prove his version of events. Rather, it would be on people like you to prove his guilt.
Game, set, match.
Get back to me when you have proof Zimmerman initiated any violence.
The shooting seems to have been in response to an unwarranted assault upon the survivor. That doesn't break any laws that I'm aware of, given the current facts that are known.
Stating that Zimmerman was looking for trouble is silly. Of course he was “looking for trouble”, but not in the sense you are insinuating. Seems pretty obvious to me he was looking out for his neighborhood and spotted someone suspicious. It seems that the incident would have ended without any altercation if the deceased had not decided to attack Mr. Zimmerman. I draw that conclusion upon the currently known facts. Pretty straightforward.
You imply that the deceased would be within HIS rights to assault Mr. Zimmerman simply because the man was suspicious and followed him or even possibly confronted him. If Mr. Zimmerman did not pointedly threaten him or attack him first, then the deceased had NO right to assault him, period.
Considering the known facts, Mr. Zimmerman was well within his rights to use whatever means were at his disposal to repel the assaulter.
The bad news is, I'm sure the authorities will bow to the pressure from the professional race baiters and others who want to appease the black community and possibly railroad this man to a prison sentence, possibly undeserved.
Interesting times, indeed.
First of all, the "chase" term you use is one you're making up, not backed up by anything in the call transcripts. Zimmerman doesn't look to be in good enough physical shape to be outrunning a teenage athlete either. Martin looks like he's in good enough condition to run rings around Zimmerman, so thinking he was afraid of that guy "chasing" him seems fanciful.
As far a valid reason? Sure. When that suspicious stranger started running away, it made him look even more suspicious. Zimmerman most likely wanted the police to actually have a chance of finding Martin so they could talk to him. Zimmerman wanted to keep him in sight so he would know where to point the police to when they arrived.
'If indeed Zimmerman lost Martin (as the transcript of the phone call shows, and is backed up by Martin telling his girlfriend that he’s lost Zimmerman) then how does Zimmerman initiate violence?'
That's where the ongoing debate is interesting. Mr. Martin's girl friend said he chose not to run and was walking, and heard the 'why are you following me' verbage on the line, before it went dead.
Mr. Zimmerman said he went back to his truck in statements to the police.
Also, throw in the perception that whoever is on top of someone in a fight is 'wrong' or the 'attacker'. But, that simply is a position during a fight.
The clear problem is who started the altercation and from what transition is to that of self defense instead of manslaughter.
I don't like Mitt but I could never vote for Rick. Ever.
Brokered Convention Please. I have a gut feeling GOP will out raise Obama bigtime.
Yeah. Maybe the party will get behind letting McCain have a rematch. :)
Even though Zimmerman called Sanford Police (not 911?) to report a "suspicious person", it appears that this kid was, at least initially, doing nothing wrong.
So Zimmerman's pursuit, and Treyvon Martin's reaction to it, set into motion a tragic chain of events. If Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, the young man made a fatal error, although one which probably shouldn't have cost him his life. Given the circumstances, I think many of us can agree that Trayvon's intent was probably not murderous.
But, in the face of such as assault, it appears that Zimmerman did have a right to defend himself, since a physical assault of unknown lethality was initiated against him.
IMHO, even though it's tragic all around, I think the police decision not to charge Zimmerman (at least with anything approaching murder) is the correct one.
Zimmerman is apparently highly distraught over the incident as well.
This is a cautionary tale, which parenthetically has no bearing on Florida's "stand your ground" law.
“The clear problem is who started the altercation”
To me this is what’s important.
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.