The Author
Grasping at straws now, aren't they?
The Author
Grasping at straws now, aren't they?
I have to say, in my immediate 6 block area I can’t tell you the names of ALL the streets around me, as I don’t use all of these streets, and I don’t even drive by some of them ever. And I have lived in my neighborhood for 16 years. I know many names but I might get the order of some of the ones incorrect if I had to list them in an order away from my street.
The thing I have noticed is most blacks have an Urban attitude about crime: “It’s none of my business.” That’s their big hangup about GZ getting out of his car to watch and see what this stranger was up to. “Was he bothering GZ? Then it was none of business.” and “He deserved an *ss-whoopin for not minding his own business.” Black people do not get involved. They do not help the police. They do not call the police unless something involves them personally. That’s why so many black people simply can not wrap their heads around the idea of a man stopping and getting out of his car to look investigate something or someone suspicious. You just don’t do that. To them that is just strange and indicates something is wrong with a person who would do that.
This is different from a Rural attitude. People notice things are out of place and wonder what’s up. They’ll even stop to say ‘Hi’ to a stranger and casually mine for info about what this person is doing around their neighbor’s place. Or they might call the police and say they keep seeing a strange car driving around.
It would seem the prosecution’s best strategy would have been to camp on the 911 call where the dispatchers clearly instructed Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon stating “We don’t need you to do that.” What was the timeline from that directive to the fatal shot?
Epic fail of analysis by whoever wrote this screed.
Zimmerman, like his attacker, was a free individual. He could roam that place whenever he pleased. Since Zimmerman LIVED there, and St. Skittles DID NOT live there, one could argue Zimmerman had more leeway to wander the complex. But I digress.
Moreover, there was no legal "directive" from the dispatcher...merely a suggestion as to how that particular person thought a report would be optimally made.
Finally, as the evidence is pointing, George's attacker got shot because he was physically threatening George's life. Period.
I end with a hilarious post from another thread on this trial:
George Zimmerman invoked an ancient right and duty to protect his neighborhood.
Before there were professional police, the Reeve of the Shire, (Sheriff) decreed that all law abiding citizens had a duty to alert their neighbors to a crime being or having been committed, and then find and bring the perpetrator to the magistrate.
This was called hue and cry and failure to act meant punishment for the whole community.
Furthermore, (2A supporters will love this), all able bodied men were MANDATED to have arms and armor in their homes.
Why is it that Mr. Martin, Mr. Buford never, ever get to the second simple question that is also largely overlooked by all the other commentators on liberal/left: “If he was so scared, why didn't Travon just go home (back to the apartment) especially when he was so close to it?
Yep, they don't want ask THAT question because they know they won't like the answer:
“Travon was a little thug whose aggressiveness led to him playing an active role in his own demise.”
Also, if a racist is following you, but not doing anything to you, that is not a license to beat the holy hell out of the cracker, right?
Based on that, the premise of everything this guy, and the prosecution says, falls apart. The only issue is, who was beating on who. And the evidence is pretty much open and shut that it was St. Traydmark beating the crap out of the Peruvian-black guy.
This is just as bad, evidence-wise, as the Duke case in which the prosecutor ended up convicted. This prosecutor should, but won't, end up the same.
These people never get tired of creating new theories as to why Zimmerman is guilty. Reminds me of the four white guys who supposedly killed OJ’s wife.
It seems as though the pursuit of the truth is unimportant. Everything is reduced to a game plan or a strategy to achieve a desired outcome as though this is some kind of athletic competition where you root for your home(boy) team. I understand attorneys have a job to do, but how do you live with yourself knowing you are framing someone, with no regard for what happens if you are successful in swinging a wrong verdict? It seems the guy who wrote this piece is willing to convict on a theory. Doubtful theories are not the threshold of evidence proving guilt the last time I checked, or, maybe they are.
Mister author... just because you are black do you have to be such a racist?
If Zimmerman was out to kill Martin, why didn’t he shot him sooner?
The title is the picture of a straw dog and the author, Larry Burford, is that picture.
Sorry, defense already Nuked the author’s argument on cross examination to the 911 dispatcher.
I think there was a sign warning people that there was a town watch in effect in that neighborhood. . Any suspicious behavior was going to be investigated according to the sign if I remember correctly. I don’t think Zimmerman did anything outside the scope of that sign. Anyone within its boundaries should have expected neighbors that were on the alert for trouble. What ever happened to “ See something, say something” that was being touted by Homeland Security ?
Yes.
Trying to see where a suspicious person went while the police are en route is not anything remotely approaching a crime.
Nobody mentions that Trevon was home and could have gone inside instead of lingering outside and setting up the man who eventually shot him. What about that? He could have just gone inside. Knowing that, how does it figure that he wasn’t being aggressive?
“We don’t need you to do that.”
1. Thats not an order
2. Legally you are under no obligation to obey any instruction given to you by a 911 dispatcher.