Black Teen Shot by Neighborhood Watch

Off Topic
1083

[quote]Revo09 wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]TDub301 wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]TDub301 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sifu wrote:
I’m guessing that you have never seen this behavior where you live, but if you have ever been to Miami it is something you see. It is part of the Miami “I’m so hood” dress code and is related to the pants down around your ass, fashion statement. To do it properly you don’t just hold onto your waistband or put your hand at your waist. They grab up their pants in such a way that it looks like they are carrying something and are using their pants to conceal it. Then there is the slouch and walk that goes with it that makes it look like there is something in their pants making it difficult to walk normal. The look is meant to give the impression that they are carrying a gun because that is what it looks like. Or as the man says at 3:38 of this I’m so hood video “pants hanging off me now cuz my pistol heavy, I’m so hood” [/quote]

The thing is, we have that in Houston as well and I don’t see “thug with potential gun” when I see it because the style is too widespread and that is NOT what most of the people with their pants sagging are doing.

That means if you attach a blatantly criminal act directly to a style, you would have to be blind to not see the mistakes that could lead to.

This kid had a bunch of store bought goods…IN THE RAIN…he was trying to keep dry. That would make anyone’s pants sag because Arizona Iced tea is pretty heavy.

That means if you see “black man with pants sagging” and immediately think “thug with gun”, you are making the same mistakes as any racist would whether you call yourself one or not. Your limited exposure to that style or the people who use it has led you to purely negative conclusions based on it that you can’t see past.

I see the same guy and none of the same thoughts enter my mind because I grew up around that culture and I’m not afraid of every black person I see who isn’t dressed like Bryant Gumble.[/quote]

So after saying all this, would you agree that suspicion is in the eye of the beholder?

You’ve mentioned that rappers have been making videos with saggy pants for decades, but you fail to realize that a lot of white people from the generation Zimmerman is a part of may have never seen a rap video in their lives.

So if there’s no exposure to this sort of thing, why is it so far-fetched for them to think it looks suspicious? Especially if all the kids in their neighborhood don’t look like that when they’re walking down the street? (this is an assumption, none of us knows how the rest of the kids there walk around their neighborhood, I’m just trying to make a point here and it is fairly likely that any given neighborhood, especially if it is a gated neighborhood in a white area, would not contain kids who wear clothes like this).[/quote]

I know this is meant for X but just so this does not get out of control.

Zimmerman is 28 younger than the every member of Jodeci hahaha.

The neighborhood was mixed.

And we have no idea how this kid clothes fit. All we know is hoodie. People guess he had hanging pants because Zimmerman said he touched his waist. As far as we know the kid just checked his zipper.

This story has enough bad details without any of us adding to it[/quote]

He could’ve just been checking his zipper. If Zimmerman was telling the truth, he said that he was walking with his hand in his waistband. This would give me the impression that he probably was holding his pants up because the tea was weighing them down, like X said earlier.

But until you know why, you can only guess. Noone has X-ray vision to see why his hand is in his waistband, all you can do is guess. It’s not out of the question to see someone walking slowly, at night, in the rain, with his hand in his pants, looking around at every house as suspicious. Yes, there’s a legitimate explanation for all of it, but that doesn’t mean that it can’t be taken as suspicious looking by anyone. Especially someone who is looking for trouble and off the rocker like Zimmerman.[/quote]

Zimmerman’s defense hinges on his belief that Tray was armed; no weapon was found on the body, and Zimmerman ended up in a fight with Tray. If Tray was armed with intent to use the weapon, there would have been clear evidence of this. No physical altercation would have ensued: two armed men = gunfight and there was no evidence to support this. If Tray had a gun, he would have shot Zimmerman in his car. Nothing supports the view that Tray was the aggressor. An approach would have allowed Zim to draw his weapon and the facts don’t support this.

Zimmerman willingly stepped out to confront the kid with a holstered weapon.[/quote]

You sure are an expert on shooting people.[/quote]

Weird how every observation I’ve made on the case has been verified thus far. That’s the difference between a manipulator of people and an observer of people. Shot any blanks at anyone lately?[/quote]
no but I would’ve shot trayvon given what we know.[/quote]

You’re obviously grasping to an argument that you know you lost 30+ pages ago. This comment was despicable and you should be ashamed of yourself. [/quote]

X2000.

HG, I have been somewhat bemused by you on these forums.
But this latest statement just shows you’re a horrible human being and you’ll be the first poster on T-Nation that I’m putting on “ignore”.

1084

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

[quote]Revo09 wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]TDub301 wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]TDub301 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sifu wrote:
I’m guessing that you have never seen this behavior where you live, but if you have ever been to Miami it is something you see. It is part of the Miami “I’m so hood” dress code and is related to the pants down around your ass, fashion statement. To do it properly you don’t just hold onto your waistband or put your hand at your waist. They grab up their pants in such a way that it looks like they are carrying something and are using their pants to conceal it. Then there is the slouch and walk that goes with it that makes it look like there is something in their pants making it difficult to walk normal. The look is meant to give the impression that they are carrying a gun because that is what it looks like. Or as the man says at 3:38 of this I’m so hood video “pants hanging off me now cuz my pistol heavy, I’m so hood” [/quote]

The thing is, we have that in Houston as well and I don’t see “thug with potential gun” when I see it because the style is too widespread and that is NOT what most of the people with their pants sagging are doing.

That means if you attach a blatantly criminal act directly to a style, you would have to be blind to not see the mistakes that could lead to.

This kid had a bunch of store bought goods…IN THE RAIN…he was trying to keep dry. That would make anyone’s pants sag because Arizona Iced tea is pretty heavy.

That means if you see “black man with pants sagging” and immediately think “thug with gun”, you are making the same mistakes as any racist would whether you call yourself one or not. Your limited exposure to that style or the people who use it has led you to purely negative conclusions based on it that you can’t see past.

I see the same guy and none of the same thoughts enter my mind because I grew up around that culture and I’m not afraid of every black person I see who isn’t dressed like Bryant Gumble.[/quote]

So after saying all this, would you agree that suspicion is in the eye of the beholder?

You’ve mentioned that rappers have been making videos with saggy pants for decades, but you fail to realize that a lot of white people from the generation Zimmerman is a part of may have never seen a rap video in their lives.

So if there’s no exposure to this sort of thing, why is it so far-fetched for them to think it looks suspicious? Especially if all the kids in their neighborhood don’t look like that when they’re walking down the street? (this is an assumption, none of us knows how the rest of the kids there walk around their neighborhood, I’m just trying to make a point here and it is fairly likely that any given neighborhood, especially if it is a gated neighborhood in a white area, would not contain kids who wear clothes like this).[/quote]

I know this is meant for X but just so this does not get out of control.

Zimmerman is 28 younger than the every member of Jodeci hahaha.

The neighborhood was mixed.

And we have no idea how this kid clothes fit. All we know is hoodie. People guess he had hanging pants because Zimmerman said he touched his waist. As far as we know the kid just checked his zipper.

This story has enough bad details without any of us adding to it[/quote]

He could’ve just been checking his zipper. If Zimmerman was telling the truth, he said that he was walking with his hand in his waistband. This would give me the impression that he probably was holding his pants up because the tea was weighing them down, like X said earlier.

But until you know why, you can only guess. Noone has X-ray vision to see why his hand is in his waistband, all you can do is guess. It’s not out of the question to see someone walking slowly, at night, in the rain, with his hand in his pants, looking around at every house as suspicious. Yes, there’s a legitimate explanation for all of it, but that doesn’t mean that it can’t be taken as suspicious looking by anyone. Especially someone who is looking for trouble and off the rocker like Zimmerman.[/quote]

Zimmerman’s defense hinges on his belief that Tray was armed; no weapon was found on the body, and Zimmerman ended up in a fight with Tray. If Tray was armed with intent to use the weapon, there would have been clear evidence of this. No physical altercation would have ensued: two armed men = gunfight and there was no evidence to support this. If Tray had a gun, he would have shot Zimmerman in his car. Nothing supports the view that Tray was the aggressor. An approach would have allowed Zim to draw his weapon and the facts don’t support this.

Zimmerman willingly stepped out to confront the kid with a holstered weapon.[/quote]

You sure are an expert on shooting people.[/quote]

Weird how every observation I’ve made on the case has been verified thus far. That’s the difference between a manipulator of people and an observer of people. Shot any blanks at anyone lately?[/quote]
no but I would’ve shot trayvon given what we know.[/quote]

[/quote]

Good for you. Pathetic piece of shit fucker

1085

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

no but I would’ve shot trayvon given what we know.[/quote]

Like I said, you are pretty much nothing but a road block in every thread you post in.

It’s not funny, and this right here is so disrespectful given the circumstances I can only assume you wrote it to be witty.

It wasn’t.

That was pretty fucking pathetic.

1086

[quote]optheta wrote:
Nothing short of Zimmerman getting convicted will convince these idiots on the forum. HELL even then they will give an excuse as to why Zimmerman is innocent.

Its a fucken joke.[/quote]
These forum “idiots” have stated multiple times that if a crime is proven, Zimmerman should have the book thrown at him. Until then, I’ll take the legal system due process over your emotional knee jerk.

1087

So when the conversation dulls it seems we slip into “Shock Jock” mode.

1088

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]TDub301 wrote:
The only thing I desire is to at least acknowledge the possibility that it could have been due to other reasons as well instead of always being quick to pull the race card. If you acknowledge that there are other possiblities, then at that point, it is wrong to accuse him of racial profiling because accusations shouldn’t be made when you don’t know all the details in any situation. It’s that simple. Nothing elitist about that in my opinion.[/quote]

[quote]TDub301 wrote:
…while you simply continue to keep jumping to the same conclusion when you don’t know all the details (admittedly, more details have come out recently that give more evidence that it WAS racially charged).[/quote]

Exactly. The POINT all along was that there wasn’t enough evidence at varying points of the discussion to justify the lynch mob mentality.

The quality of the discussion in this thread declined EXTREMELY sharply once those people participating in the circle jerk got a little more traction with one another. Nonsensical posts about John White, Emmett Till and “people in this thread being more respectful now that there is more than one black guy posting” all accomplished nothing but shift this from a fairly respectful discussion to a total cluster fuck… and they were all so caught up in an “honest people vs closet racists” mentality that they didn’t have the intellectual honesty to call out one another for their bullshit analogies, irrelevant commentary and shit reading comprehension in order to keep the discourse at even an even MODERATELY entertaining level.

It’s remarkable to see witness how quickly this discussion devolved once enough people started using it as an emotional outlet rather than a place to toss around evidence-based opinions.[/quote]

Well this whole case is about emotions on both sides. How is speculating on what really happened going to determine anything? Personally I think the case is pretty clear cut and I’m speaking on the actual actions, not the motives or anything like that.

As I’ve said before, the moment this guy decided to play cop is the moment the subsequent consequences (i.e. this kid’s death) fell on him. He took an innocent life and it’s his fault. And that’s from a purely moral point of view - I don’t know much about the legal implications involved in the case.

1089

To the hurt butts,

From the beginning I’ve said without proof, it is unfair to justify a virtual lynching of a guy who may or may not have commited a crime.

I mentioned my faith in legal due diligence being greater than conjecture based on loosely known facts.

I mentioned my support of deadly force as a form of self defense.

Given zimmermans injuries we know there was a scuffle. Based on testimony and police response along with those wounds, we know this isn’t a simple case of murder.

Depending on how you choose to view “evidence” in this scenario, a case of self defense can certainly be made.

And, in a case of self defense, I would shoot too.

Fact is, none of us really know what happened exactly or why. It’s all conjecture. Emotionally driven assumptions. As stated, if the man commited a murder, I hope they stick it to him. If, on the other hand, this is a case of self defense, so be it. We don’t know.

He’s not your son, not your brother, doesn’t represent an entire race… he’s one dude who either got caught up at the wrong place at the wrong time and became a victim or made his eternal bed. We simply don’t know. Remove your emotion to a case you are not attached to.

If this sentiment is ignore worthy, flamebait worthy et cetera, that is your prerogative. I support our laws and have faith in the legal system and will supportive of whichever route an official investigation with first hand knowledge and probably a wider base of knowledge concludes in the matter.

1090

More facts are coming out, and it appears the media and the race-hustlers were up to their usual tricks:

  • According the Zimmerman, at no time did Zimmerman intend to confront Mr. Martin, but rather was confronted by Martin because he was following him.

  • Regardless, before an officer arrived, Martin and Zimmerman got into a fight and Zimmerman was losing, badly.

Zimmerman says he was beaten and knocked down. This is consistent with physical evidence and eye witness testimony: (A) Police found blood on face and the back of Zimmerman’s head as well as grass on the back of his shirt, indicating he had been knocked down and (B) Thirteen-year-old Austin Brown stepped out his front door and heard people fighting, he told the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday. “I heard screaming and crying for help,” he said. “I heard, 'Help me” (apparently from the loser of the fight) – he saw a man in a red shirt ? now known to be Zimmerman ? who was knocked and beaten on the ground, with the standing attacker closing. Then he heard a shot.

  • The chief witness, Mary Cutcher, who has been claiming Zimmerman attacked Martin has crumbled. Mary Cutcher told the media, “I know this was not self-defense. There was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling.” Police said they twice tried to interview her without success, and the third time, she wrote a very short sworn statement that was consistent with Zimmerman’s account – in short, there was a fight because Martin took umbridge at being followed by neighborhood watch.

  • Trivia: George Zimmerman is Hispanic and grew up in a multiracial (black, white, and hispanic) family.

1091

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
More facts are coming out, and it appears the media and the race-hustlers were up to their usual tricks:

  • According the Zimmerman, at no time did Zimmerman intend to confront Mr. Martin, but rather was confronted by Martin because he was following him.

  • Regardless, before an officer arrived, Martin and Zimmerman got into a fight and Zimmerman was losing, badly.

Zimmerman says he was beaten and knocked down. This is consistent with physical evidence and eye witness testimony: (A) Police found blood on face and the back of Zimmerman’s head as well as grass on the back of his shirt, indicating he had been knocked down and (B) Thirteen-year-old Austin Brown stepped out his front door and heard people fighting, he told the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday. “I heard screaming and crying for help,” he said. “I heard, 'Help me” (apparently from the loser of the fight) – he saw a man in a red shirt ? now known to be Zimmerman ? who was knocked and beaten on the ground, with the standing attacker closing. Then he heard a shot.

  • The chief witness, Mary Cutcher, who has been claiming Zimmerman attacked Martin has crumbled. Mary Cutcher told the media, “I know this was not self-defense. There was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling.” Police said they twice tried to interview her without success, and the third time, she wrote a very short sworn statement that was consistent with Zimmerman’s account – in short, there was a fight because Martin took umbridge at being followed by neighborhood watch.

  • Trivia: George Zimmerman is Hispanic and grew up in a multiracial (black, white, and hispanic) family.

[/quote]
This will be completely ignored.

1092

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
More facts are coming out, and it appears the media and the race-hustlers were up to their usual tricks:

  • According the Zimmerman, at no time did Zimmerman intend to confront Mr. Martin, but rather was confronted by Martin because he was following him.[/quote]

I read the article along with this:

…Someone’s info is wrong. He left his car on tape to follow the kid. If he did that, how can they claim he never intended to confront the kid? Why not stay in the car and follow? The kid ran and he gave chase. Why would anyone think he was NOT following them with intent to harm?

1093

[quote]Professor X wrote:
…Someone’s info is wrong. He left his car on tape to follow the kid. If he did that, how can they claim he never intended to confront the kid? Why not stay in the car and follow? The kid ran and he gave chase. Why would anyone think he was NOT following them with intent to harm?[/quote]

It’s a third party writing that statement, so let’s just wait until Zimmerman speaks.

But regardless, the fact remains, as neighborhood watch, Zimmerman did, indeed, have legal right to tail people in the neighborhood as he saw fit. Zimmerman got his ass beaten exercising his legal right, was laying on the ground, and defended himself from an attacker while laying beaten on the ground.

Now, that may be a crime, but whatever it is, it’s a far cry from the racist loose cannon who shot Martin unprovoked the media have been painting Zimmerman as.

In fact, if you read that article, you’ll note black neighbors coming forward defending Zimmerman.

1094

Zimmerman ADMITTED he was following Martin, and Martin’s girlfriend corroborates this with her account of the phone convo she had with Martin moments before he was shot to death.

And if you think Zimmerman was the victim here, nice try. He hunted down Martin, making Zimmerman THE threat that Martin had the right (according to ‘stand your ground’ law) to attack when threatened - by a man 100 lbs heavier than Martin AND carrying a firearm.

1095

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
This will be completely ignored.[/quote]

I know. Race is apparently more important than facts here.

And again, I don’t know what happened, but it’s increasingly looking like Martin confronted Zimmerman for tailing him, Martin kicked Zimmerman’s ass, and while laying on the ground and about to have his head kicked in, Zimmerman pulled his pistol.

You’ve got three witnesses to this: (lady who changed her story, kid, and Zimmerman)

You’ve got pysical evidence: grass, etc.

I’m most interested in Martin’s autopsy to see the angle of the shot — if it came from the ground and went into Martin from his front — that will tell the tale of a beaten man on the ground defending himself.

1096

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
This will be completely ignored.[/quote]

I know. Race is apparently more important than facts here.

And again, I don’t know what happened, but it’s increasingly looking like Martin confronted Zimmerman for tailing him, Martin kicked Zimmerman’s ass, and while laying on the ground and about to have his head kicked in, Zimmerman pulled his pistol.

You’ve got three witnesses to this: (lady who changed her story, kid, and Zimmerman)

You’ve got pysical evidence: grass, etc.

I’m most interested in Martin’s autopsy to see the angle of the shot — if it came from the ground and went into Martin from his front — that will tell the tale of a beaten man on the ground defending himself.

[/quote]

And Martin was found lying face down, so let’s see if he was shot in the back… so according to you, he kicked Zimmerman’s ass and was heading home.

1097

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
…Someone’s info is wrong. He left his car on tape to follow the kid. If he did that, how can they claim he never intended to confront the kid? Why not stay in the car and follow? The kid ran and he gave chase. Why would anyone think he was NOT following them with intent to harm?[/quote]

It’s a third party writing that statement, so let’s just wait until Zimmerman speaks.

But regardless, the fact remains, as neighborhood watch, Zimmerman did, indeed, have legal right to tail people in the neighborhood as he saw fit. Zimmerman got his ass beaten exercising his legal right, was laying on the ground, and defended himself from an attacker while laying beaten on the ground.

Now, that may be a crime, but whatever it is, it’s a far cry from the racist loose cannon who shot Martin unprovoked the media have been painting Zimmerman as.

In fact, if you read that article, you’ll note black neighbors coming forward defending Zimmerman.[/quote]

Who was the third party writing the statement?

Were the black neighbors friends of Martin or Zimmerman?

“This Zimmerman fellow is a continuing example of the white man getting away with murder of a young black brother” -Al Sharpton, Politics Nation, MSNBC

“Al… Zimmerman is Hispanic” - guest of show

“Huh?..well I guess I was misinformed” - Al Sharpton, Politics Nation, MSNBC

Perhaps we should let all of this play out…let a jury decide…the court of public opinion is a scary thing.

For the record, I think Zimmerman should be arrested and tried.

1098

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
This will be completely ignored.[/quote]

I know. Race is apparently more important than facts here.

And again, I don’t know what happened, but it’s increasingly looking like Martin confronted Zimmerman for tailing him, Martin kicked Zimmerman’s ass, and while laying on the ground and about to have his head kicked in, Zimmerman pulled his pistol.

You’ve got three witnesses to this: (lady who changed her story, kid, and Zimmerman)

You’ve got pysical evidence: grass, etc.

I’m most interested in Martin’s autopsy to see the angle of the shot — if it came from the ground and went into Martin from his front — that will tell the tale of a beaten man on the ground defending himself.

[/quote]

I feel like if he was shot as you suggested it would’ve been evident from the very beginning.

It is not hard to tell where a bullet entered and exited … I have my doubts that an autopsy would be required. Especially for the forensics teams who deal with this sort of thing all the time.

I guess I understand they’d have to officially verify it though with an autopsy… but I can’t help but wonder if it wouldn’t have been at least hinted at by now.

1099

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Zimmerman ADMITTED he was following Martin, and Martin’s girlfriend corroborates this with her account of the phone convo she had with Martin moments before he was shot to death.

And if you think Zimmerman was the victim here, nice try. He hunted down Martin, making Zimmerman THE threat that Martin had the right (according to ‘stand your ground’ law) to attack when threatened - by a man 100 lbs heavier than Martin AND carrying a firearm.

[/quote]
Exactly.

1100

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
And Martin was found lying face down, so let’s see if he was shot in the back…[/quote]

People who die (or faint or whatnot) most typically fall forward (or straight down, resulting in a forward tilt) for various biomechanical reasons. It wouldn’t matter from which direction he was shot, so this is a red herring.

Maybe it’s the doctor in me, but I, too, would be most interested in the bullet trajectory, to determine if we have standing or laying shooter.

Sincerly,

Mrs. Jewbacca

P.S.: I concur with those who refuse to try (or acquit) this man in the court of public opinion.

1101

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Zimmerman ADMITTED he was following Martin, and Martin’s girlfriend corroborates this with her account of the phone convo she had with Martin moments before he was shot to death.

And if you think Zimmerman was the victim here, nice try. He hunted down Martin, making Zimmerman THE threat that Martin had the right (according to ‘stand your ground’ law) to attack when threatened - by a man 100 lbs heavier than Martin AND carrying a firearm.

[/quote]
So following some one in a public setting is a crime? Nope. Who ever initiated physical contact is the aggressor. Security gaurds are now illegal? If I’m walking around and some dude seems to be following me I can just kick the shit out of him?

If it was Zimmerman escalating the situation to violence then yes, Martin was within his rights and Zimmerman is a murderer.

If, on the other hand, the witness testimony and corresponding evidence are correct, Zimmerman was within his rights.

We… Don’t… Know.

And of course the girlfriend would give an account favoring Martin. Not exactly an impartial source of info. Neither is the Martin family lawyer, whose inciteful comments largely ignited this shit storm before the facts were in.

He’s a good lawyer no doubt, in that slimey, dishonest way that lawyers are. Keep the source of story versions in mind when reading.

1102

[quote]krazykoukides wrote:
I feel like if he was shot as you suggested it would’ve been evident from the very beginning.
[/quote]

I’ve done my share of autopsies, and you may be correct. But it takes a while to get to the doctor.

Sometimes. Depends on how fresh the body is and how damaged, as well as other things like distance from weapon. Here, with a pistol, it should be reasonably easy. I suspect, in fact, there won’t be an exit would, which makes it a lot easier.

This would be wrong.

This would be correct and is probably why the Hispanic guy is not in prison.

Sincerly,

Mrs. Jewbacca.