[quote]Grneyes wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
These comics are all caricatures of the events that transpired and are being blatantly and unapologetically used as pro-Martin propaganda.[/quote]
One noodle of copypasta for you to mull over.[/quote]
Whoa…I did not write that!!![/quote]
Oops – I did.
That being said, with that quote in mind, do you see where my comments are coming from? In the context of nearly everything I’ve written in this discussion?
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
Who gives a shit if he has black friends or not? He can still be racist. I have black friends and I will still be more afraid of a black man walking towards me at night on an empty street than I would a white man. [/quote]
That’s not racism, that’s rationality.
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America.
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
It’s not just you. This “stand your ground” bullshit seems way too easy to misuse. There have been many other cases like this because of this “law”. Because of this, you can literally go out and kill someone and get away with it. It is a gun owner’s dream…and a shit load of people’s nightmare. This is just the first case to get this much publicity.
Also race is a factor because blacks are tired of being held accountable as if “skin color” is enough reason to keep me under a more watchful eye of the law. After hearing we are just seeing things, of course the black community will stand up when a case like this hits the news.
It is the backlash of being told you are making shit up constantly while being pulled over more often all because of skin tone.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
It’s not just you. This “stand your ground” bullshit seems way too easy to misuse. There have been many other cases like this because of this “law”. Because of this, you can literally go out and kill someone and get away with it. It is a gun owner’s dream…and a shit load of people’s nightmare. This is just the first case to get this much publicity.
Also race is a factor because blacks are tired of being held accountable as if “skin color” is enough reason to keep me under a more watchful eye of the law. After hearing we are just seeing things, of course the black community will stand up when a case like this hits the news.
It is the backlash of being told you are making shit up constantly while being pulled over more often all because of skin tone.[/quote]Right, a sports car/bike isn’t the “profiled” object.
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
Essentially, American “stand your ground” laws allow qualifying citizens the right to a state license granting rights to conceal and carry weapons on their person for self defense. Concealed carry licenses do provide more rights than that though. The idea is to not be caught a hapless victim though you hope never to use your rights to deadly force.
If you kill someone, the case is investigated. Should laws have been broken, you are charged with murder. Otherwise, the homicide you commited is considered justified, no charges are filed and off you go, a licensed citizen who protected himself from a threat by the book.
It’s not a license to run around shooting people all willy nilly as has been speculated and lampooned here.
I understand the backlash, it is extreme injustice, but these kind of things are used to incite anger and further divide races by the media imo. you start to see just how disconnected from eachother people can be.
for me the main issue would be to get this guy in jail and ask the authorities for a detailed explanation as to why it took so long.
I dont know if anyone is familiar with the london riots that occured last year, but a police officer killed an unarmed young dude and four days of riots ensued (whites, blacks, arabs, asians, everyone got pissed off at the police at the same time). the media had little chance of calling it just a racist murder, as there was unity in the outrage from young people that overshadowed something as petty as the colour of skin. (initially of course. before it just turned into mass looting)
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
Essentially, American “stand your ground” laws allow qualifying citizens the right to a state license granting rights to conceal and carry weapons on their person for self defense. Concealed carry licenses do provide more rights than that though. The idea is to not be caught a hapless victim though you hope never to use your rights to deadly force.
If you kill someone, the case is investigated. Should laws have been broken, you are charged with murder. Otherwise, the homicide you commited is considered justified, no charges are filed and off you go, a licensed citizen who protected himself from a threat by the book.
It’s not a license to run around shooting people all willy nilly as has been speculated and lampooned here.[/quote]
when you say “should laws have been broken you are charged with murder”
does that mean if someone attacks me, unarmed, and i shoot them dead, im a free man? since a firearm is just an extension of my defensive capabilities, im actually allowed to pull it out and shoot at someone in a fist fight?
The law is basically “meet force with force”. The officers that responded did not find probable cause at the scene to arrest him (accroding to Zimmerman’s broken nose, head lacerations and witness statements). The Grand Jury is now reviewing the case for possible indictment.
This is one of those stories that sounds terrible on it’s face, but I think legally the guy might have been justified in context of the law. Did he initiate this incident, is he a dumbass and is the law fucked up? Those are questions for a different time and outside the scope of what happened when the crime (assualt) occurred.
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
Essentially, American “stand your ground” laws allow qualifying citizens the right to a state license granting rights to conceal and carry weapons on their person for self defense. Concealed carry licenses do provide more rights than that though. The idea is to not be caught a hapless victim though you hope never to use your rights to deadly force.
If you kill someone, the case is investigated. Should laws have been broken, you are charged with murder. Otherwise, the homicide you commited is considered justified, no charges are filed and off you go, a licensed citizen who protected himself from a threat by the book.
It’s not a license to run around shooting people all willy nilly as has been speculated and lampooned here.[/quote]
when you say “should laws have been broken you are charged with murder”
does that mean if someone attacks me, unarmed, and i shoot them dead, im a free man? since a firearm is just an extension of my defensive capabilities, im actually allowed to pull it out and shoot at someone in a fist fight?
[/quote]
It depends on the scenario. If you play an equal part in escalating a situation to violence, no. If you are attacked, yes. It doesn’t work if you’re at a bar, exchange words, get in to a fist fight and decide to just shoot the guy. If, on the otherhand, he just starts attacking or you get mugged, et cetera yes, you may shoot. You can act on anothers behalf too, at least in Texas.
Each state governs its own self defense laws. Many share similarities but there can be small but important differences.
The race card is a red herring in this case.
Guy is neighborhood watch not a police man or security guard. It’s not against the law to walk through a gated community if you’ve been given access and the neighborhood watch aren’t the people to question someone just for walking. Their job is to walk around making sure that nobody is breaking into homes. If someone breaks into a home then they call the cops and they let them handle it. If this guy had done just that we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Furious - Yes, if someone attacks you then you can shoot them which is OK. But you can’t start a fight and then use a gun.
james
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
Essentially, American “stand your ground” laws allow qualifying citizens the right to a state license granting rights to conceal and carry weapons on their person for self defense. Concealed carry licenses do provide more rights than that though. The idea is to not be caught a hapless victim though you hope never to use your rights to deadly force.
If you kill someone, the case is investigated. Should laws have been broken, you are charged with murder. Otherwise, the homicide you commited is considered justified, no charges are filed and off you go, a licensed citizen who protected himself from a threat by the book.
It’s not a license to run around shooting people all willy nilly as has been speculated and lampooned here.[/quote]
when you say “should laws have been broken you are charged with murder”
does that mean if someone attacks me, unarmed, and i shoot them dead, im a free man? since a firearm is just an extension of my defensive capabilities, im actually allowed to pull it out and shoot at someone in a fist fight?
[/quote]
Apparently the kid was on top of Zimmerman beating his head into the ground and punching him. He sustained a broken nose and lacerations to his head. This is where the legal experts are going to make their money. Is a weapon justified in this case? Because you can use a weapon if there is an aggravated assault vs a simple assult. Agg assault is either with a weapon OR causing great bodily harm. “Great bodily harm” is usually requiring hopitialization. Then yes, you can use deadly force to combat an aggravated assault. That’s the law.
This means if i wanted to kill someone intentionally, all i had to do was verbally aggravate them to the point of attacking me (Which would not be very hard) assaulting me badly enough, then shoot them dead. As long as it looked like i was the victim, none of the eye witnesses heard what i was saying or how the disagreement began, and i had no known motive/there was no recorded instances where i had come into contact with that individual in the past, i get a free kill.
I dont think the problem of people being assaulted or killed can be solved by allowing citizens to carry weapons in the name of self defence. imo firing a weapon in a fist fight turns defence into complete one sided offence.
unless that person’s life was in some kind of potential threat (a stalker for example) , or it came with some level of professional training, and the person learning and demonstrating the ability to make rational decisions while under pressure and/or physical trauma during an altercation.
and i suspect not everyone who is licensed to carry a firearm is even cut out for that level of rationale and responsibility. actually now of course we all know this.
it seems compeltely illogical to me. if this guy had a can of pepper spray, CS Gas or some other non lethal weapon it would have made alot more sense.
I would rather be shot dead defending myself with my bare hands, then take a beating and have to resort to shooting my opponent. some people need to grow a pair. and this guy definitely needs to go to jail, but the law is defending injustice.
imo
[quote]Brett620 wrote:
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
im unfamiliar with Self defence/assault laws or gun laws in america
but if two guys get into a physical fight, one shoots and kills the other who is completely unarmed, he should be in court explaining what happened, and then listening to how many years he’s getting for what he did.
watching the news here i couldnt actually believe when they said police have not arrested and jailed the guy. He was identified as the shooter, the kid is dead, the kid was unarmed and minding his own business. forget if he was good or bad, black or white, who started the fight ect. by leaving him free its like there is no consequence to those actions.
Imo that way of thinking gives the right to any cowardly pussy who gets into a fist fight to pull out a weapon and fire.
even if the kid got pissed off and was beating the shit out of him, he should have fought back like a man or taken his beating and realised he wasnt physically fit to be on ‘neighbourhood patrol’ or whatever its called.
arming a civilian (especially a weirdo like this dude) and expecting him to identify between criminal and regular person on the street without professional law enforcement training or any prior intel on that particular person is insanity and a tragedy waiting to happen. even police officers make mistakes.
maybe its me, but i just dont understand America. [/quote]
Essentially, American “stand your ground” laws allow qualifying citizens the right to a state license granting rights to conceal and carry weapons on their person for self defense. Concealed carry licenses do provide more rights than that though. The idea is to not be caught a hapless victim though you hope never to use your rights to deadly force.
If you kill someone, the case is investigated. Should laws have been broken, you are charged with murder. Otherwise, the homicide you commited is considered justified, no charges are filed and off you go, a licensed citizen who protected himself from a threat by the book.
It’s not a license to run around shooting people all willy nilly as has been speculated and lampooned here.[/quote]
when you say “should laws have been broken you are charged with murder”
does that mean if someone attacks me, unarmed, and i shoot them dead, im a free man? since a firearm is just an extension of my defensive capabilities, im actually allowed to pull it out and shoot at someone in a fist fight?
[/quote]
Apparently the kid was on top of Zimmerman beating his head into the ground and punching him. He sustained a broken nose and lacerations to his head. This is where the legal experts are going to make their money. Is a weapon justified in this case? Because you can use a weapon if there is an aggravated assault vs a simple assult. Agg assault is either with a weapon OR causing great bodily harm. “Great bodily harm” is usually requiring hopitialization. Then yes, you can use deadly force to combat an aggravated assault. That’s the law.
[/quote]
You are assuming quite a bit. Why would this kid attack someone unless he felt his life was at risk? If Zimmerman pulled the gun first, he still has a right to claim “self defense”?
This kid was on the phone with his girl. It would take some extreme contrast of emotion to go from that to trying to subdue Zimmerman…for no reason.
Where was Zimmerman’s gun? If it was visible, are people saying if I see a guy running after me with a GUN and I fight back, he is justified in shooting me???
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
DN, you realize your comics are like 5 days behind story revelations right?[/quote]
I would say not really but i’m sure someone would accuse me of jumping mindlessly to her defence just because she is a girl ( a girl i will never meet or care about in anyway)[/quote]
They absolutely are.
They portray a grossly inaccurate account of the events that showcase Zimmerman as being a predatory racist out to get his rocks off by killing a darky.
The KKK outfit doesn’t acknowledge his black friends commenting on his behalf in the media.
The chasing-while-shooting comic doesn’t address the fact that two eyewitnesses reported Martin was on top of Zimmerman right about when the shot was fired.
The Skittles/iced tea comic has no bearing on the issue of whether or not Martin was the aggressor under Florida law. It’s an appeal to emotion in the exact same vein as newspapers harping about “gun vs Skittles”.
The picture of Zimmerman shooting a baby with a lollipop… well, you get the point. These comics are all caricatures of the events that transpired and are being blatantly and unapologetically used as pro-Martin propaganda.
Again, though, arguing this further would imply DN has made a relevant or insightful contribution to this thread at some point that warrants further discussion.[/quote]
Who gives a shit if he has black friends or not? He can still be racist. I have black friends and I will still be more afraid of a black man walking towards me at night on an empty street than I would a white man. Why? Because it’s been drilled in my head through media that black men are more dangerous than white men. Especially to a white woman. I know that’s not true, but it’s still there, in my subconscious. I can have black friends and still be afraid to go to the south side of Chicago by myself, any time of day. Why? Because I’m the wrong color. It’s, sadly, a way of life and a way of thinking that I don’t think we will ever get away from.
[/quote]
It could also be due to crime statistics
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
I dont get why race is such a huge factor in this. Wether the guy was racist or not isnt important imo
[/quote]
My understanding is that the race angle is important because if it is determined that race came into play, Zimmerman can be tried in US Federal Court for a hate crime (a Federal Offense).
If race didn’t come into play, than the Fed’s don’t have any right to the case.
Has anyone seen a timeline recreation of the events based on all the phone calls made?
I would be interested to see a timeline based on phone records to show what calls were made/ended and when.
I’m not sure if such a piece of evidence will come out until a trial though.
[quote]FuriousFists wrote:
This means if i wanted to kill someone intentionally, all i had to do was verbally aggravate them to the point of attacking me (Which would not be very hard) assaulting me badly enough, then shoot them dead. As long as it looked like i was the victim, none of the eye witnesses heard what i was saying or how the disagreement began, and i had no known motive/there was no recorded instances where i had come into contact with that individual in the past, i get a free kill.
I dont think the problem of people being assaulted or killed can be solved by allowing citizens to carry weapons in the name of self defence. imo firing a weapon in a fist fight turns defence into complete one sided offence.
unless that person’s life was in some kind of potential threat (a stalker for example) , or it came with some level of professional training, and the person learning and demonstrating the ability to make rational decisions while under pressure and/or physical trauma during an altercation.
and i suspect not everyone who is licensed to carry a firearm is even cut out for that level of rationale and responsibility. actually now of course we all know this.
it seems compeltely illogical to me. if this guy had a can of pepper spray, CS Gas or some other non lethal weapon it would have made alot more sense.
I would rather be shot dead defending myself with my bare hands, then take a beating and have to resort to shooting my opponent. some people need to grow a pair. and this guy definitely needs to go to jail, but the law is defending injustice.
imo[/quote]
The law could certainly be abused by a criminal mind like any other.
Meanwhile, it has saved innocent victims from losing their wallets to keeping their lives, avoiding rape et cetera and certainly has its merit.
In this country, attacking a person is illegal. Baiting an attack so that you can kill a guy you don’t like would be sleazy, but an attack is an attack legally.
To each their own opinion but we do have self defense rights I personally support and that’s how it is.
[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
So what is known:
Zimmerman was neighborhood watch guy. He had the legal right to ask people what they were up to in the neighborhood.
Martin was on suspension for 10 days from school and thus not in school when normal kids would be.
A fight ensued, unclear who started it, but Zimmerman says Martin attacked him for questioning him.
It is not clear who is bigger, to me. Martin is 6’2", which is small to me, but big to a lot of people.
Zimmerman was getting his ass beaten. According to multiple witnesses, he was on the ground, Martin on top of him (per above) pounding him. Zimmerman screaming for help.
Zimmerman shot Martin in the chest while being beaten.
All the stuff about Zimmerman calling him a “coon” or whatever having been debunked as bullshit. By all accounts, Zimmerman had family, friends, and neighbors of many races.
Now, this was clearly an avoidable incident. If Zimmerman was a professional, he would need to be fired and worse because he (apparently) handled the initial contact poorly.
But Zimmerman had the right to confront Martin.
Martin attacked Zimmerman. Now Martin’s attack may be justified because he had no idea who Zimmerman was. That would be an issue if Martin was alive and Zimmerman dead. That’s not what happened.
Here, Zimmerman shot Martin. Was that justified?
Zimmerman was laying on the ground, no way to escape, no help coming. He was getting his ass beaten.
In such a circumstance, regardless of the “stand your ground” law, he had the right to stop the assault, and did so.
It amazes me at all the so-called liberals on this site who care about their fellow man who are so eager to convict Zimmerman because of political correctness and race-baiting. That’s as bad as lynching a black guy in the situation was reversed.
[/quote]
[/quote]
I’m a bit late to the party here, but I can verify that Zimmerman, unless he’s grown A LOT since HS, is a lot smaller than Martin, and if you call him or either of his siblings “white” they’d be pissed. They are proudly Peruvian. Spanish was the language spoken in the house growing up. I went to school with them and have known them my whole life. His older brother was in my grade and GZ was in my sister’s grade.
[/quote]
I’m a bit late to the party here, but I can verify that Zimmerman, unless he’s grown A LOT since HS, is a lot smaller than Martin, and if you call him or either of his siblings “white” they’d be pissed. They are proudly Peruvian. Spanish was the language spoken in the house growing up. I went to school with them and have known them my whole life. His older brother was in my grade and GZ was in my sister’s grade.
[/quote]
Fascinating. The dynamics of this case are interesting. Viewpoints and opinions are interesting - what is your take on this…