George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin What We Don't Know

Backwoods Home Magazine ^ | 3/24/12 | Massad Ayoob

[ebshumidors]

The death almost a month ago of 17-year old Trayvon Martin at the hands of appointed neighborhood watch leader George Zimmerman has become a cause célèbre that has even drawn the notice of our President, who notes that if he had a son he would probably look like Trayvon. I’m seeing some defending Zimmerman, and most demanding his head on a platter, and a whole lot of people who don’t understand how the justice system is geared to approach these things. As I’ve said earlier in this blog, in answer to reader query, we don’t know enough about what happened to rush to judgment yet, whether that judgment is justified self-defense, murder, or manslaughter. The police have made it clear that there is evidence that has not yet been made public, and may not be put forth until the Grand Jury examines the case next month. Some issues: The autopsy results, including toxicology screen, have not yet been released. If it turns out that the young man who died was fueled by drugs known to cause violent behavior, could that change our perceptions? That knowledge is not yet in our hands. (Reportedly, Zimmerman was not tested, and police indicate that he showed no signs of drug or alcohol impairment.) My advice to YOU if YOU’RE ever involved in a shooting: request to be taken to a hospital to have a blood sample and toxicology screen taken. A “negative for everything” result will prevent false allegations later that you were drunk or drugged-up when you pulled the trigger.

[PhatHead]

The whole trespassing question is being dodged as well; was the kid trespassing?

He was not. It has been clearly established, and is disputed by nobody, that Martin was an invited guest, staying with a resident of the neighborhood (his father's girlfriend.) He died less than 100 feet from that house.

[Hardraade]

Mr Hardraade (can’t even spell apparently, its Hardrada)

Evidently, you're even dumber than you let on.

The correct form is "Hardråde", but english-speakers lack the umlaut. So the workaround in your alphabet is "aa". There is no such thing as "Hardrada". Dumb is as dumb does, evidently.

[FreedomPoster]

I still think that one is a few years old. The team for his high school is the Lightning.

[PhatHead]

The kid was unarmed. He was not attacking Zimmerman or threatening his property. Zimmerman was a hot dog cop-wannabe who never should have had a firearm.

You are leaping and bounding to all kinds of conclusions. We have enough facts - not dependent on Zimmerman's word - to have some understanding about his state of mind and his actions.

When the operator suggested that "we don't need you to (follow)" Zimmerman said "okay" and clearly stopped following. He remained on the phone for nearly two more minutes, during which he said he could no longer see Martin and did not know where "this kid" was. He nervously declined to give his own address in case Martin was still nearby and could overhear.

If Zimmerman wanted a confrontation, why wouldn't he just roll down his window and confront Martin when he first spotted him? Why wouldn't he yell, "Get back here, you punk!"? Because he didn't do those things.

You say Martin "was not attacking Zimmerman," but we don't actually know who started the fight. We do know, by the account offered by Martin's girlfriend (who has no motive to make Zimmerman look better,) that Martin started the conversation. And we know from multiple witness accounts that it somehow turned into a fistfight. We also know that Zimmerman asked for help - yelled for it - before firing that shot.

I honestly don't understand why so many seem to buy into the characterization of Zimmerman as some kind of vigilante, when everything we know about that night says that he was not.

I support the Second Amendment and the right to carry and the castle doctrine, but defending Zimmerman is wrong. Just let it play out in the courts, let justice proceed and STOP DEFENDING THIS GUY. He’s a threat to US and the Second Amendment through his apparently irresponsible behavior.

When did being a watchful neighbor become "irresponsible," much less a terrible threat to the nation?

He may have showed poor judgment trying to spot Martin again to report his location to the cops, but I could see myself doing that. And Martin showed poor judgment deciding to confront the guy he thought was following him instead of just going home - but I could see myself doing that, too.

I can put myself in either one of their shoes and see myself doing the exact same things they did - up to a point. It is a terrible human tragedy that they both chose not to simply explain to each other who they were and why they were there.

It is entirely possible to believe Zimmerman is not a criminal, but still believe Martin was an innocent victim. It is also possible to believe that Zimmerman may have committed a crime, but that there is no evidence to prove it. That's not "defending this guy," it's seeking the truth, and hoping for justice - even if justice means no charges are filed.

But I am afraid that too many people, who have neither the facts, nor the inclination to learn the facts, have already politicized and publicized this to the point where there is no doubt in my mind that Zimmerman is going to end up in jail.

[chris37]

It is you who is the racist, sir.

[P-Marlowe]

no. I said STOP DEFENDING HIM

Then you ought to likewise STOP CONDEMNING HIM!

[PhatHead]

Okay. I’ll defend Zimmerman.

I agree that there is a rush to judgment against Zimmerman, most of it quite irresponsible, but I still think it is important to correct a few facts:

1. He was walking in a public place. Nothing illegal about walking behind someone.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman was following, and certainly no evidence that he was "pursuing" Martin. I think it is almost certain that after hanging up the phone he walked behind the houses to try to spot him. That's an assumption, but one I make based on the fact that the shooting occurred behind the houses. But your point stands: Zimmerman's actions were legal, and not unreasonable, although one could certainly argue it was poor judgment to go looking for Martin.

2. He had a legal right to his gun.

3. There were robberies in his neighborhood. Someone who didn’t live there (trespass?) was walking through.

There definitely was no trespass. Martin was also well within his rights and acting legally. He was a guest of a resident. He died less than 100 feet from the house where he was staying.

4. He called 911 but without telling the cops where to go when they arrived there’s no suspect if it turns out a robbery took place.

He did not call 911. He called the Sanford Police non-emergency number because there was no crime and no emergency, just a suspicious person.

5. He lost sight of TM and headed back to his SUV.

We don't know for sure that he was headed back to his car. We have one characterization of his statement, not Zimmerman's own words on this. We definitely do know that he lost sight of Martin, though, because he stated this on his recorded call to the police. What people overlook is that after agreeing to stop following Martin, Zimmerman remained on the phone for almost two more minutes, during which he said he no longer could see "this kid" and did not know where he was.

6. TM confronted him and started hitting him.

We do not know who started the hitting. We do, however, have the account of Martin's girlfriend that it was Martin who started the conversation:

TM: Why are you following me?
GZ: What are you doing here?

What happened next, we do not know, but I think we can safely assume that neither one of them went on to explain to the other who he was or what he was doing there. Instead, two young men faced each other, both wondering what that weirdo wanted, each one knowing he was right, and neither one wanting to turn away. And that is a damn shame.

7. TM broke his nose.

This has been confirmed by Zimmerman's attorney, but it is not relevant if Zimmerman started the fistfight, which is something we do not know.

8. Zimmerman asked a witness for help and to call 911.

He called for help. I have heard no account where he specifically asked for somebody to call 911 - until after the shooting. One 911 caller said it was Zimmerman, crouched over Martin's body, who told her to call.

9. Zimmerman fired his gun in self defense due to threat of immediate bodily harm.

Well, that's the question, isn't it? What we know at this point is that the police say this was Zimmerman's claim, and that there is no evidence yet to contradict his story.

What’s your case to prosecute him or even arrest Zimmerman?

And that's what it comes down to. I do not understand why so many are joining the rush to judgment - or even the rush to prosecution when we know an awful lot of facts, none of which add up to a case against Zimmerman. It is perfectly rational to believe that Zimmerman is innocent of a crime. It is also reasonable to think that maybe he isn't, but there is not enough evidence to charge him.

[PhatHead]

I am glad you posted on Zimmerman's record, because I think it is another thing that has been exaggerated in order to portray him as some sort of violent criminal. I hope you don't mind if I flesh these out a little:

2005-CF-009525-A-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL
07/18/2005
Criminal Felony
Closed CR-RESISTING OFFICER WITH VIOLENCE
BATTERY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

2005-MM-010436-A-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL
07/18/2005
Orlando
Misdemeanor
Closed CR-RESISTING OFFICER WITHOUT VIOLENCE

These two charges stem from the same incident (obviously.) The 21-year-old Zimmerman mouthed off and had some sort of scuffle with agents of Florida's Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, who were in a University of Central Florida area bar for some underage drinking enforcement. I'm not saying he should have done it, and I'm not saying those guys do not have police powers. I am saying that a 21-year-old scuffling with alcohol agents in a bar sounds a lot different to me than "assault on a police officer." And I am thinking it sounds different to the State of Florida, too, since they issued him a concealed carry permit, which is something convicted felons can't get.

2005-DR-012980-O ZUAZO, VERONICA vs. ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE M 08/09/2005
Domestic Violence
Closed - SRS

2005-DR-013069-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE M vs. ZUAZO, VERONICA A 08/10/2005
Domestic Violence
Closed - SRS

I'm not sure if you noticed this, but one of these charges is against Zimmerman by Veronica Zuazo. The other is by Zimmerman against her - his ex-girlfriend. Break-ups and arguments going public like this are quite distasteful, but unfortunately not uncommon. I suspect the reason they are sealed is that neither party is all that proud of it.

I think this stuff is about as relevant as Martin's school suspension. In other words, not at all.

He did not stop following Trayvon when requested to do so. Zimmerman was following Trayvon in his truck.

That is not true. When the operator suggested that "we don't need you to (follow)" Zimmerman replied "Okay." He remained on the phone for nearly two more minutes, during which time he said he did not know where "this kid" had gone, and could not see him.

Zimmerman with a gun and a history of an overabundance of 911 calls. Zimmerman seems to have been a train wreck waiting to happen.

I am not sure what you'd consider to be an "over abundance." The Miami Herald reports that Zimmerman called police to the neighborhood 46 times since January 2011. They also report that during the same period, police had been called to the neighborhood a total of 402 times, and investigated eight burglaries, nine thefts and one prior shooting. So what is your complaint? Zimmerman reported more than his fair share of incidents?

A grown man (with a gun) following a 17 year old in a pickup truck. Who would not be spooked?

I'm not sure how you know it was a pick-up truck. I recognize news reports are often inaccurate, but they all seem to refer to his SUV. I suspect you are trying to paint a certain picture, but ultimately, it does not matter what kind of car he drove. Speaking of pictures, here is a more recent one of George Zimmerman:

We just do not know enough to make any judgments about what happened that night Let the facts come out.

On this, we agree. But what bothers me more than the things we don't know is how much of what so many claim to know that just isn't true.

[PowderMonkey]

Apples and oranges. You’re describing very different circumstances, reasons, and outcomes for undergoing those tests. I’ve been there, pal. Never go out of your way to place yourself at the mercy of the lab techs.

[kearnyirish2]

“It has been clearly established, and is disputed by nobody, that Martin was an invited guest, staying with a resident of the neighborhood (his father’s girlfriend.)”

That isn’t going to help the shooter; thanks for the info.

[PhatHead]

That isn’t going to help the shooter; thanks for the info.

No, and that's not why I posted it. I just think people need to base their opinions, as much as it is possible, on the facts. Although it should be noted that it won't necessarily hurt him, either (in combination with all the facts.)

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

I hope you don't mind if I flesh these out a little:

Not at all..that's what we are here for. :)

I think this stuff is about as relevant as Martin's school suspension. In other words, not at all.

True.

That is not true. When the operator suggested that "we don't need you to (follow)" Zimmerman replied "Okay." He remained on the phone for nearly two more minutes, during which time he said he did not know where "this kid" had gone, and could not see him.

Thank you for that correction. I used the word truck because that is what was used in an article I had just finished reading. Nothing was meant by that.

So what is your complaint? Zimmerman reported more than his fair share of incidents?

A listing of his 911 calls are here:
911 Calls

Some are justified and some seem appropriate for the non-emergency line. As a parent I would welcome someone telling me my kids were playing in the road, but to call 911 instead? Overkill in my opinion. It may not be fair, but when I read that, I think of someone looking for reasons to call 911.

Best I can do right now..I have been out in the yard all day and my brain is as tired as my body.

[kearnyirish2]

I thought you posted it because I didn’t know, and I appreciate it. I’m not here to help the shooter; in fact, I’ve maintained that I don’t know enough to form an opinion on it (and your piece of information helps - I’m less inclined to support the shooter knowing that).

Thanks again.

[PhatHead]

Some are justified and some seem appropriate for the non-emergency line.

Yes, they certainly do - and some are to the non-emergency number. Most of them, in fact. Unfortunately, the police department labeled the document a little carelessly, but you can see each incident labeled under "Call Source" as either "911" or "TEL." For example, his call the night of the shooting was not to 911, either.

As a parent I would welcome someone telling me my kids were playing in the road, but to call 911 instead? Overkill in my opinion. It may not be fair, but when I read that, I think of someone looking for reasons to call 911.

The call about the kids in the street was not to 911, but I don't think I would call the police at all about something like that. However, we are assuming he knew who their parents were. We are also assuming that he didn't talk to their parents. Maybe he did, but the parents didn't do anything about it.

I still don't think I would call the cops about something like that, but I know people who would. I'd welcome anybody who is interested to scroll through his calls and judge for themselves.

And when you do, ask yourself this, also: How do you think a guy who calls the cops instead of confronting those parents (or children) squares with the now popular characterization of Zimmerman as some out of control vigilante who takes the law into his own hands?

Because that sounds to me like two different people.

I have been out in the yard all day and my brain is as tired as my body.

Yeah, I was cleaning out the garage myself. Time for a cold beer...or maybe just a nap.

[ZULU]

I’ll have to tell that to all the American and English historians who spell it the other way.

[ZULU]

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada

MY language? I guess you aren’t even American.

[bert]

We also do not know how many kids Trayvon has. A jock, black youth is likely a father several times over

[rktman]

So, it would appear that he was never convicted of the DA charge or even went to trial. Dismissed? I also believe that if you have a DA charge you don’t get a permit. Of course nobody NEEDS a permit to carry in any case. But, if you get caught...............bad news for you. Even though you shouldn’t have to have a permit to carry.

[GOPJ]

http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/05/white_relief

...in 2005, blacks represented 13% of the U.S. population but accounted for nearly half of its murder victims. Most of the black murder victims — 93% —were killed by other black people.

*************************************************

If Bush had said the same - that a white victim of a black man looked like his son - the MSM would have called him racists and a divider - and they would have been right. Here’s a link to New York Times ‘journalists’ talking about their support of democrats and their contempt for conservatives. They are unaware a conservative is in the room.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBFOmUXR080