[quote]Grneyes wrote:
Did anyone read how now Zimmerman is saying he was retreating to his truck and was attacked by Trayvon? According to CNN: Zimmerman told the dispatcher he was following the boy, but the dispatcher told him that wasn’t necessary. Moments later, several neighbors called 911 to report a commotion outside, and police arrived to find Martin dead of a gunshot wound.
“Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by Trayvon,” the police said in the letter posted by Bonaparte.
And of course no one can refute that, since the other person involved is DEAD.[/quote]
That is not consistent with what Trayvon’s overheard on the phone. She said there was an exchange of words. If that is correct, and the phone records indicated Trayvon and friend were on the phone at that time, Zimmerman could very much be lying.[/quote]
And why didn’t he say he was retreating since the beginning? Only NOW is he saying he was going back to his truck which makes Trayvon the aggressor.[/quote]
…and how is his word being taken as truth at all when he called the kid a drug user but his blood was clean?[/quote]
lol, oh christ…so now a person’s inability to telekinetically drug test somebody means everything he says is a lie?
He told the police that same night he was attacked on his way back to the truck. I’m not saying he’s telling the truth, but the pair of you are trying to find cracks where there aren’t any.
If anybody’s story is sketchy it’s the girlfriend who took 3 weeks to come forward, and then only answered rehearsed questions asked by the family’s own attorney.[/quote]
I’ve never heard that he was going back to his truck until now. That’s why I’m questioning it.
[quote]StevenF wrote:
I think Al Sharpton needs to just shut the fuck up already. [/quote]
Because he’s vocal about civil rights, or because he’s black?
As an American, I would have expected you would support his right to speak. [/quote]
As an American, I would expect you to support the right of innocence until proven guilty.[/quote]
Oh the irony. As an American, I would have expected you to support being proven guilty in court of law…not being killed by a overzealous neighborhood watchman in public.[/quote]
As sad as the situation is, Trayvon would not be dead if he didn’t decide to attack Zimmerman. Zimmerman clearly didn’t do everything right, and played a part in creating the incident, but in the end, escalation to physical violence was Trayvon’s doing and is directly the reason Zimmerman thought he needed to use his firearm to defend himself.[/quote]
Zimmeran’s neglect…(and highly possible bias,racism or whatever) is what escalated the situation. There comes a point when Trayvon himself had the right to defend himself against what could HIGHLY be perceived as a crazy ass stranger harassing him…and trying to (illegally) detain…and question him. At what point did Zimmerman have the authority for his actions?? He had a right…up to a point…but once he crossed the line,he became responsible for all that transpired after that.
The thing is that Zimmerman is not being held responsible in any form for his screw ups in the incident. I think that’s the major outrage. Damn shame…what a completely fucked up ordeal. [/quote]
The “Stand Your Ground” law apply equally to Martin’s self-defense. If Zimmerman approached him aggressively and didn’t identify himself, it could easily be argued Martin would actually be the one protected under the law. I’m not going to say I know Zimmerman is a murdering racist, but everyone refusing to look at Martin’s side of it is equally as reactionary as they people they are arguing with.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and how is his word being taken as truth at all when he called the kid a drug user but his blood was clean?[/quote]
lol, oh christ…so now a person’s inability to telekinetically drug test somebody means everything he says is a lie?
He told the police that same night he was attacked on his way back to the truck. I’m not saying he’s telling the truth, but the pair of you are trying to find cracks where there aren’t any.
If anybody’s story is sketchy it’s the girlfriend who took 3 weeks to come forward, and then only answered rehearsed questions asked by the family’s own attorney.[/quote]
Besides, Zimmerman said Trayvon LOOKED LIKE HE WAS ON DRUGS OR SOMETHING.
He DID NOT STATE THAT TRAYVON WAS A DRUG USER.
Does anyone seriously need me to explain the difference between something stated as a subjective opinion and a statement made as an objective fact? To detail the differences between being mistaken and being an outright liar?
I’ve been saying this probably every other post, but the arguments and critical thinking of some of the most vocal participants in this thread is simply mind-blowingly awful.
THIS is the reason why I keep participating in this dumb ass thread – trying to keep some of the people here on track and honest with their input. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills, though, because so many people seem completely oblivious to how nonsensical their responses are.
[quote]StevenF wrote:
I think Al Sharpton needs to just shut the fuck up already. [/quote]
Because he’s vocal about civil rights, or because he’s black?
As an American, I would have expected you would support his right to speak. [/quote]
As an American, I would expect you to support the right of innocence until proven guilty.[/quote]
Oh the irony. As an American, I would have expected you to support being proven guilty in court of law…not being killed by a overzealous neighborhood watchman in public.[/quote]
As sad as the situation is, Trayvon would not be dead if he didn’t decide to attack Zimmerman. Zimmerman clearly didn’t do everything right, and played a part in creating the incident, but in the end, escalation to physical violence was Trayvon’s doing and is directly the reason Zimmerman thought he needed to use his firearm to defend himself.[/quote]
That’s probably the reason he won’t be convicted.[/quote]
Of murder. I still would not be surprised to see(an albeit relatively minor) charge stick to him. Manslaughter could still apply as well, Zimmerman used deadly force against an unarmed minor, even if he was being assaulted that could land him a decent charge.[/quote]
Yes.
[quote]B.L.U. Ninja wrote:
Anyone who sees this as anything other than one delusional man who had a false sense of authority making a fatal decision to confront a teen WHILE armed is way over thinking.
Facts:
-Zimmerman had black friends. Other black neighbors are on record saying they actually liked Zimmerman and vice-versa because Zimmerman had thwarted previous thieves and vandals in their gated community.
-Trayvon was innocent. If he did “cause” a fight, it was out of self-defense because Zimmerman clearly was in the wrong pursuing the teen when he did not have any AUTHORITY in the first place.
So no, this isn’t about racism AT ALL. Racial profiling because of previous, NUMEROUS incidents where black teenagers have been caught stealing from the neighborhood, a definite yes. If you were a neighborhood watchman, you would be suspicious too, but Zimmerman carrying a loaded gun was the ONLY fatal mistake in this case. Without it, no one would have had to pay for their lives.
And to that idiot who tweeted that the fact that Trayvon was wearing a hoodie was THE factor to blame is a fucking short-sighted moron.
Zimmerman had a severe case of Hero Syndrome and was ego/power tripping HARD. He took his “position” as a watchman WAAAAAAY too far, and the police officers in his neighborhood were largely responsible for this. (See, Police Chief’s son getting away with beating a black kid, etc…)[/quote]
Pretty much nailed it. But this narrative isn’t sexy and dosen’t get ratings like “Innocent Black Teen Gunned Down By Racist White Man”. I can’t wait for all the back peddling once all the facts are released.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and how is his word being taken as truth at all when he called the kid a drug user but his blood was clean?[/quote]
lol, oh christ…so now a person’s inability to telekinetically drug test somebody means everything he says is a lie?
He told the police that same night he was attacked on his way back to the truck. I’m not saying he’s telling the truth, but the pair of you are trying to find cracks where there aren’t any.
If anybody’s story is sketchy it’s the girlfriend who took 3 weeks to come forward, and then only answered rehearsed questions asked by the family’s own attorney.[/quote]
Besides, Zimmerman said Trayvon LOOKED LIKE HE WAS ON DRUGS OR SOMETHING.
He DID NOT STATE THAT TRAYVON WAS A DRUG USER.
[/quote]
They are kinda the same thing…
To say someone looks like they are on drugs must mean that they use drugs yes?
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
I think this guy just assumes all black people are druggies? Or all people wearing saggy pants are druggies? He makes a big assumption about “punks”. This kid, while wearing saggy pants, was obviously not a punk. His grades were good. And as ppl have stated already, schools are cracking down hard and over-disciplining for stupid infractions.[/quote]
I think this pic is relevant here.
Read the facebook exchange, the kid was selling weed.
[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
They are kinda the same thing…
To say someone looks like they are on drugs must mean that they use drugs yes?[/quote]
Saying someone looks like they are on drugs is a subjective conclusion reached by making observations of their behavior and mentally cross-referencing those characteristics with reasons that would likely explain them. This is an interpretive process that is very much open to opinion and speculation.
Stating outright that someone is a drug user is a statement of fact.
Someone can be a drug user without either being on anything at that moment or showing any indications of use even with drugs being active in their system. Conversely, someone can appear to be on drugs without actually having taken anything.
Make sense? If so, can you see where the logic breaks down in X’s dismissal of Zimmerman’s account of events?
No? OK – just because Zimmerman reached an incorrect conclusion about the cause of what he perceived to be irregular behavior from Martin doesn’t necessarily mean he is lying about… pretty much anything. Zimmerman’s ACTUAL quote indicates that he was MISTAKEN… X’s version of his quote makes him a LIAR.
I’d explain further, but I am going to wait to see just how many people misinterpret that statement to mean I’m claiming Zimmerman is being truthful about everything that happened.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and how is his word being taken as truth at all when he called the kid a drug user but his blood was clean?[/quote]
lol, oh christ…so now a person’s inability to telekinetically drug test somebody means everything he says is a lie?
He told the police that same night he was attacked on his way back to the truck. I’m not saying he’s telling the truth, but the pair of you are trying to find cracks where there aren’t any.
If anybody’s story is sketchy it’s the girlfriend who took 3 weeks to come forward, and then only answered rehearsed questions asked by the family’s own attorney.[/quote]
Besides, Zimmerman said Trayvon LOOKED LIKE HE WAS ON DRUGS OR SOMETHING.
He DID NOT STATE THAT TRAYVON WAS A DRUG USER.
[/quote]
They are kinda the same thing…
To say someone looks like they are on drugs must mean that they use drugs yes?
[/quote]
Not anymore. Apparently they drug tested the body for NO reason…but didn’t test Zimmerman.
[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
They are kinda the same thing…
To say someone looks like they are on drugs must mean that they use drugs yes?[/quote]
Additionally, I underlined the “or something” part because it further illustrates that Zimmerman hadn’t made a definitive, factual statement about Martin being a drug user.
So, again, saying he “lied” about Martin’s drug use is not a factually correct statement. As such, any conclusions that branch off from that assertion are not logically sound.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and how is his word being taken as truth at all when he called the kid a drug user but his blood was clean?[/quote]
lol, oh christ…so now a person’s inability to telekinetically drug test somebody means everything he says is a lie?
He told the police that same night he was attacked on his way back to the truck. I’m not saying he’s telling the truth, but the pair of you are trying to find cracks where there aren’t any.
If anybody’s story is sketchy it’s the girlfriend who took 3 weeks to come forward, and then only answered rehearsed questions asked by the family’s own attorney.[/quote]
Besides, Zimmerman said Trayvon LOOKED LIKE HE WAS ON DRUGS OR SOMETHING.
He DID NOT STATE THAT TRAYVON WAS A DRUG USER.
[/quote]
They are kinda the same thing…
To say someone looks like they are on drugs must mean that they use drugs yes?
[/quote]
Not anymore. Apparently they drug tested the body for NO reason…but didn’t test Zimmerman.[/quote]
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
The Black Panthers have offered a $10,000 bounty on any vigilante who can capture George Zimmerman. In other news, they failed to appreciate the irony.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
Yep!
[/quote]
Does not matter.
It is not about what he intended, but what courts make of it.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
I missed that, but it is a good thing. It might make it easier for a manslaughter charge to stick, even though I think he deserves a murder charge. It does make sense too. If some person I don’t know starts following me while I am walking down the street, I am sure as hell going to feel at least a little bit threatened and do something about it. I would probably call the cops instead of my girlfriend, though.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
Yep!
[/quote]
Does not matter.
It is not about what he intended, but what courts make of it.
Separation of powers and all. [/quote]
True, but I have a hard time believing a jury will not agree that the stand your ground law does not apply if you follow an underage kid down the street at night and don’t even identify yourself.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
I saw where Zimmerman was headed back to his truck when he got attacked.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
Yep!
[/quote]
Does not matter.
It is not about what he intended, but what courts make of it.
Separation of powers and all. [/quote]
True, but I have a hard time believing a jury will not agree that the stand your ground law does not apply if you follow an underage kid down the street at night and don’t even identify yourself.
[/quote]
Agreed. I would feel I have a right to protect myself if someone chases me down the street…especially if after I ask why all I get is another question of what I am doing there.
Zimmerman’s life is at risk and he is in hiding now with his family. He had no authority to chase people and corner them.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
Did y’all see where the author of the Florida stand your ground law said emphatically that the law would not apply to Zimmerman because he pursued Martin?[/quote]
Yep!
[/quote]
Does not matter.
It is not about what he intended, but what courts make of it.
Separation of powers and all. [/quote]
True, but I have a hard time believing a jury will not agree that the stand your ground law does not apply if you follow an underage kid down the street at night and don’t even identify yourself.
[/quote]
Agreed. I would feel I have a right to protect myself if someone chases me down the street…especially if after I ask why all I get is another question of what I am doing there.
Zimmerman’s life is at risk and he is in hiding now with his family. He had no authority to chase people and corner them.[/quote]
Either way (prison or freedom) his life is fucked.
