|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP. |
|
|
On March 23 2012 13:03 Leporello wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 12:49 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:32 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet.
I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920 I did read all of the posts. Being the one on the ground holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head doesn't make you someone who is doing a "preemptive assault" or "beat him in the head when he was already knocked down" You see where this leads to? And in your previous post I see that you already recognize the inconsistence in this guy's posts "didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently." There is no evidence yet to suggest that Zimmerman took out his weapon at any point before when he used it. Should all try to keep things factual based with our opinion on those facts. There is also no evidence that Trayvon started the fight, yet lots of people seem to assume this despite the fact it was confirmed he originally decided to flee when he started being chased by someone weighing almost 100lb more than him. Saw a post earlier that said this Show nested quote +It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on . I find it absolutely laughable that somebody actually expects a 17 year old kid, being chased by an older male significantly heavier than he is during the dead of the night to just stop and have a conversation with the bloke lol. You would need to have literally no survival instincts if when being pursued by someone older and stronger than you (with a gun) your choice of action is to just stand there and hope the guy wants a conversation. In fact, almost all evidence suggests that Zimmerman started the fight. Which is what makes the whole self-defense argument ridiculous and insulting. What happened in their "fight" doesn't matter -- it's what or who caused the fight that mattered. And to put it in language that even children can understand and appreciate: Zimmerman started it. Evidence such as recorded testimony from Zimmerman himself that he was following the kid around with a loaded gun, is the only evidence needed to debunk "self-defense" and for the police to do, y'know, some actual work. I think we need to ask ourselves how an adult can claim "self-defense" for shooting a kid that he admittedly followed around, in suspicion, with a gun. Just because Zimmerman lost a fight that he initiated doesn't make for self-defense. And, yes, all evidence suggests Zimmerman initiated that fight (except for the testimony of Zimmerman himself, of course). The premise for self-defense has apparently gone haywire. If I follow and approach someone I don't know, across private property, I'm provoking them -- and then if I get my ass kicked (assuming, for no reason, that that is actually what happened here), that doesn't give me the right to then shoot and kill. So even if we're to believe that Trayvon was beating up Zimmerman after Zimmerman chased this kid down -- isn't that Trayvon's right to defend himself? Why are some of us so anxious to assume that "right to defend" goes to the a-hole with the gun and an agenda?
Following and approaching someone is not a crime or an attack in any way.
I seriously hope you never leave something behind at a coffee shop and have a helpful stranger come after you to give you it if you think that would justify you assaulting them and pummeling them in the face while they are on the ground screaming for help.
|
Looks and sounds like murder to me. Sadly the guy will probably get off scott free.
|
On March 23 2012 13:09 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:03 Leporello wrote:On March 23 2012 12:49 Ryder. wrote:On March 23 2012 12:32 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet.
I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920 I did read all of the posts. Being the one on the ground holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head doesn't make you someone who is doing a "preemptive assault" or "beat him in the head when he was already knocked down" You see where this leads to? And in your previous post I see that you already recognize the inconsistence in this guy's posts "didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently." There is no evidence yet to suggest that Zimmerman took out his weapon at any point before when he used it. Should all try to keep things factual based with our opinion on those facts. There is also no evidence that Trayvon started the fight, yet lots of people seem to assume this despite the fact it was confirmed he originally decided to flee when he started being chased by someone weighing almost 100lb more than him. Saw a post earlier that said this It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on . I find it absolutely laughable that somebody actually expects a 17 year old kid, being chased by an older male significantly heavier than he is during the dead of the night to just stop and have a conversation with the bloke lol. You would need to have literally no survival instincts if when being pursued by someone older and stronger than you (with a gun) your choice of action is to just stand there and hope the guy wants a conversation. In fact, on the contrary, every evidence suggests that Zimmerman started the fight. Which is what makes the whole self-defense argument ridiculous and insulting. What happened in their "fight" doesn't matter -- it's what or who caused the fight that mattered. And to put it in language that even children can understand and appreciate: Zimmerman started it. Evidence such as recorded testimony from Zimmerman himself that he was following the kid around with a loaded gun, is the only evidence needed to debunk "self-defense" and for the police to do, y'know, some actual work. I think we need to ask ourselves how an adult can claim "self-defense" for shooting a kid that he admittedly followed around, in suspicion, with a gun. Just because Zimmerman lost a fight that he initiated doesn't make for self-defense. And, yes, all evidence suggests Zimmerman initiated that fight. It's such blatant BS. If I follow and approach someone I don't know, across private property, I'm provoking them -- and then if I get my ass kicked (assuming, for no reason, that that is actually what happened here), that doesn't give me the right to then shoot and kill. So even if we're to believe that Trayvon was beating up Zimmerman after Zimmerman chased this kid down -- isn't that Trayvon's right to defend himself? Why are some of us so anxious to assume that "right to defend" goes to the a-hole with the gun and an agenda? Not sure if you quoted my post because you misinterpreted what I said and think I disagree with you, but just to clarify I agree 100% with everything you said in that post. Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:02 NotSorry wrote:
Also what's the deal with all you agreeing that you would instantly start running away from anyone getting out of a truck and walking towards you? My first reaction would be "Hey man, what's up?" not to turn and run away. Yeah, because at night in what everybody agrees to be a notoriously dangerous area, when you are a 17 year old kid and a large male gets out of a truck and starts pursuing you, we should just assume his intentions are pure, right? Edit: So many people in this thread are just looking to get their asses kicked if this is how they think you should respond in a situation like this, I strongly suggest you don't go walking at night time with attitudes like this.
I grew up in South LA, and even there I wouldn't just run from some guy getting out of his truck. I pity you for having to live with such mistrust of every human being you don't know, it must be rough.
For all you know the guy is lost or looking for something, and opening that channel of dialog you can get a feeling for people before they get in range of you. Now if you call out to him and he doesn't reply while making a bee line towards you that's another story but just him getting out of a truck shouldn't scare you into instantly running away.
|
On March 23 2012 13:11 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:05 dAPhREAk wrote:
i read the second as saying he was just getting out of his truck and was attacked (i.e., right after his call with the dispatcher), and the first as he went looking for the kid, didnt find him, returned to his car and then was attacked. i dont even care anymore. there are just so many inconsistencies in the news articles. While I see how it can be read that way, and the reporter probably wants you to make that assumption, it's really just a case of him leaving out a few details. He's obviously quite biased since he claims the girlfriend's testimony contradicts Zimmerman's story when it certainly does not. Zimmerman says he followed Trayvon, and there's no way to tell who attacks first from phone noises. People don't go "I am attacking you now!", "Oh no, you are attacking me now and I am on the defensive!"
And you still state in more than a handfull posts that it was a "preemptive assault"?
|
Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child.
This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1w9MA.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WOFyf.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZJswb.jpg)
|
On March 23 2012 13:15 Kaitlin wrote:You're wrong there. But it's ok to make shit up in this thread.
Could you classify a suspect's testimonial as evidence? If so my bad. I always thought of evidence more as something concrete, too many semesters doing forensics I guess.
|
On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business. + Show Spoiler +
he has a baby's face. so sad. =(
edit: holy shit. i hope you dont find my facebook page. =(
|
On March 23 2012 13:02 NotSorry wrote:
Also what's the deal with all you agreeing that you would instantly start running away from anyone getting out of a truck and walking towards you? My first reaction would be "Hey man, what's up?" not to turn and run away.
According to his girlfriend, she told him to run, and he said he was just going to walk faster. Apparently when Zimmerman catches up to his fast walk, Martin said "Why are you following me?" and Zimmerman said "What are you doing here?"
That new article you pulled up daPhrEAk made an interesting point that if it was the other way around and Martin had had the gun and shot Zimmerman, it would have been basically the exact representation of SYG. Martin was somewhere he had every right to be, was doing nothing illegal, and a large unknown man came up to him threateningly and provoked him. If Martin had shot Zimmerman it would been the literal textbook example of the SYG law. Interesting food for thought.
Nice Funday Monday joke too 
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business.
You are a piece of work, and a real piece of shit.
User was warned for this post
|
Asking "What are you doing here?" is instantly threatening and provoking?
|
On March 23 2012 13:24 Wrongspeedy wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business. I honestly hope I get banned for calling you a piece of shit.
dont martyr or you will get banned. edit it out.
|
On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business.
Oh good, now we can assume that the kid being involved in the weed business makes him even more likely to be someone who initiates provocations like you keep claiming.
|
On March 23 2012 13:23 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business. + Show Spoiler + he has a baby's face. so sad. =( edit: holy shit. i hope you dont find my facebook page. =(
Wait a minute, if that date is right means he died exactly 3 weeks after he turned 17.....
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business.
Love it. Makes it a lot more plausible that he actually did go after Zimmerman. Zimmerman is still an idiot and it's still his fault (for following and for bringing a gun). But at least I'm plausibly buying the self-defense claim as such.
|
Trayvon being a drug dealer still doesn't change anything with the evidence
|
On March 23 2012 13:18 NotSorry wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:09 Ryder. wrote:On March 23 2012 13:03 Leporello wrote:On March 23 2012 12:49 Ryder. wrote:On March 23 2012 12:32 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet.
I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920 I did read all of the posts. Being the one on the ground holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head doesn't make you someone who is doing a "preemptive assault" or "beat him in the head when he was already knocked down" You see where this leads to? And in your previous post I see that you already recognize the inconsistence in this guy's posts "didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently." There is no evidence yet to suggest that Zimmerman took out his weapon at any point before when he used it. Should all try to keep things factual based with our opinion on those facts. There is also no evidence that Trayvon started the fight, yet lots of people seem to assume this despite the fact it was confirmed he originally decided to flee when he started being chased by someone weighing almost 100lb more than him. Saw a post earlier that said this It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on . I find it absolutely laughable that somebody actually expects a 17 year old kid, being chased by an older male significantly heavier than he is during the dead of the night to just stop and have a conversation with the bloke lol. You would need to have literally no survival instincts if when being pursued by someone older and stronger than you (with a gun) your choice of action is to just stand there and hope the guy wants a conversation. In fact, on the contrary, every evidence suggests that Zimmerman started the fight. Which is what makes the whole self-defense argument ridiculous and insulting. What happened in their "fight" doesn't matter -- it's what or who caused the fight that mattered. And to put it in language that even children can understand and appreciate: Zimmerman started it. Evidence such as recorded testimony from Zimmerman himself that he was following the kid around with a loaded gun, is the only evidence needed to debunk "self-defense" and for the police to do, y'know, some actual work. I think we need to ask ourselves how an adult can claim "self-defense" for shooting a kid that he admittedly followed around, in suspicion, with a gun. Just because Zimmerman lost a fight that he initiated doesn't make for self-defense. And, yes, all evidence suggests Zimmerman initiated that fight. It's such blatant BS. If I follow and approach someone I don't know, across private property, I'm provoking them -- and then if I get my ass kicked (assuming, for no reason, that that is actually what happened here), that doesn't give me the right to then shoot and kill. So even if we're to believe that Trayvon was beating up Zimmerman after Zimmerman chased this kid down -- isn't that Trayvon's right to defend himself? Why are some of us so anxious to assume that "right to defend" goes to the a-hole with the gun and an agenda? Not sure if you quoted my post because you misinterpreted what I said and think I disagree with you, but just to clarify I agree 100% with everything you said in that post. On March 23 2012 13:02 NotSorry wrote:
Also what's the deal with all you agreeing that you would instantly start running away from anyone getting out of a truck and walking towards you? My first reaction would be "Hey man, what's up?" not to turn and run away. Yeah, because at night in what everybody agrees to be a notoriously dangerous area, when you are a 17 year old kid and a large male gets out of a truck and starts pursuing you, we should just assume his intentions are pure, right? Edit: So many people in this thread are just looking to get their asses kicked if this is how they think you should respond in a situation like this, I strongly suggest you don't go walking at night time with attitudes like this. I grew up in South LA, and even there I wouldn't just run from some guy getting out of his truck. I pity you for having to live with such mistrust of every human being you don't know, it must be rough. For all you know the guy is lost or looking for something, and opening that channel of dialog you can get a feeling for people before they get in range of you. Now if you call out to him and he doesn't reply while making a bee line towards you that's another story but just him getting out of a truck shouldn't scare you into instantly running away.
Did you even listen to the 911 call Zimmerman made? Zimmerman didn't call out to Trayvon and try to state his intentions, he just started chasing him whilst on the phone to the cops. Does it sound like he was lost or looking for something?
I'm not stating a blanket rule for every single hypothetical situation in which somebody starts following you, I'm looking at the specific facts of this case, where Zimmerman made no attempt at stating his intentions and literally just made a bee line towards him.
|
On March 23 2012 13:21 NotSorry wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:15 Kaitlin wrote:On March 23 2012 13:11 NotSorry wrote:
A suspect's word is never evidence. You're wrong there. But it's ok to make shit up in this thread. Could you classify a suspect's testimonial as evidence? If so my bad. I always thought of evidence more as something concrete, too many semesters doing forensics I guess.
all testimony is evidence. but you obviously can impeach a defendant's testimony based on the fact that he/she is the suspect.
|
On March 23 2012 13:24 Wrongspeedy wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 13:21 Zaqwe wrote:Here are some more recent pictures of Trayvon with his "gangster grill" to give people an idea of who they are talking about when they keep referring to him as though he were some helpless child. This "kid" apparently also was in the "plant" selling business. I honestly hope I get banned for calling you a piece of shit.
I don't hope you get banned. You should be allowed to say what you want.
|
On March 23 2012 13:26 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 13:21 NotSorry wrote:On March 23 2012 13:15 Kaitlin wrote:On March 23 2012 13:11 NotSorry wrote:
A suspect's word is never evidence. You're wrong there. But it's ok to make shit up in this thread. Could you classify a suspect's testimonial as evidence? If so my bad. I always thought of evidence more as something concrete, too many semesters doing forensics I guess. all testimony is evidence. but you obviously can impeach a defendant's testimony based on the fact that he/she is the suspect.
Okay, my misunderstanding then
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
