Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman

[playnthru]

any opinions on this?

Yes..Your information is false.

Stand your ground law was not used in the George Zimmerman case! It is purely a self defense case. Zimmerman was found Not Guilty because of Self Defense laws...No stand your ground law applies here,it was not even considered.

That seems common in this case. People don't know/understand the facts, but are willing to convict an innocent man because of it.

The media keeps spouting about 'stand your ground laws', when it didn't apply in this case. It was purely a self defense case..

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

The stand your ground law is essentially the self defense law in florida.

Obviously If you initiate contact with somebody and they start to beat you up it only makes sense to lay back and wait for death. You initiated contact so their actions are now your responsibility....

Thats not what I meant at all.If george wouldnt have followed him george wouldnt have needed to defend himself in the first place.The moment he followed him, he put both of them in danger.

Your point about Martin being unaware of Zimmerman's intentions is very true. However, preemptive self defense by attacking somebody who might be about to mug you isn't defensive. Following somebody can be threatening behavior, but it is cannot be considered assault. The appropriate reaction for Martin would have been to prepare to react to an attack, defuse the situation, or flee.

I still believe that Zimmerman acted very inappropriately for the reasons you've outlined, bur consider his actions once the attack started to be self defense.

Edit: The prosecution seriously mentioned MLK? Yeesh.

Once again he initiated the attack by following him, im not saying trayvon beating him up was right at all.Im saying they both should be held equally accountable.Like I said if trayvon killed him, chances are he wouldve got off free from killing zimmerman.More than likely the story would have been totally different because it would have been from his perspective.
A speech MLK made that was in relevance with the case and the question of profiling was brought up..Whats the issue with that?

Trayvon could've told the guy to piss off or to leave him alone. He could have even struck Zimmerman in self defense, but you don't ground and pound a guy in self defense. You don't mount a guy, bash his head into the concrete, and then see his gun and say, "you gonna die". That's felony battery and threatening murder. He didn't run away, and he didn't give Zimmerman a chance to flee.

What was Zimmerman supposed to do?

Should I list the numerous things zimmerman should have done prior to the altercation? If the story is true then zimmerman had the right to kill him, how ever this isnt the point.The point is he approached trayvon and trayvon felt threatened.Why would trayvon just attack him for no reason ?

He was walking back to his car after checking the street sign.

He was getting out the car when they said dont follow him.. You can hear the seat belt coming off when the dispatcher said he dont need to follow him.

Begging your pardon, I've come late to the Martin/Zimmerman case.
A few elementary questions:

1) Was Martin shot and killed inside a gated community?
2) Did Martin pass through a gate?
3) Was Zimmerman employed or recognized as a security guard for the gated community?

1.Yes, a community he was a part of
2.Yes, the gate was either open or his family member that lived there opened the gate or gave him a code to open the gate
3.No he isnt a security guard he was a neighborhood watchman, and like a watchman he looks like and have no more authority than a normal civilian.

 

[arora]

Why do so many people think a dispatcher has any authority at all? Seriously, are we a society now where we not only need our hand held at every turn but also demand all others submit to the hand holding as well? The next time I take a dump I'm going to call some governmental agency and ask how many paper squares I should use to whipe.

Yeesh, we have laws, the laws work, they work best when people take responsibility.

[/general rant not specific to the case]

Now then, is it known if Martin knew Zimmermen was part of the neighborhood watch?

 

[McLaren]

None of it makes sense, more than likely if you get away your gonna run away.I believe they both were in the wrong going by george story.But still to me george was in the wrong and initiated the entire situation the moment he jumped out the car and followed him and should be held accountable for everything that happened afterwards.

Except that's NOT what Martin did.

He got away out of Zimmerman's sight & then decided to come back on the offense when Zimmerman was leaving. Zimmerman's initial decision to follow Martin may not have been right, but Martin was given a chance to save his own life & leave. Nothing he did was self-defense the moment Zimmerman had lost him & was leaving b/c he was no longer a threat to Martin.

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

Why do so many people think a dispatcher has any authority at all? Seriously, are we a society now where we not only need our hand held at every turn but also demand all others submit to the hand holding as well? The next time I take a dump I'm going to call some governmental agency and ask how many paper squares I should use to whipe.

Yeesh, we have laws, the laws work, they work best when people take responsibility.

[/general rant not specific to the case]

Now then, is it known if Martin knew Zimmermen was part of the neighborhood watch?

I dont know why people would think that.The dispatcher only advised him not to because they knew no good could come out of it, once again its not breaking law what he did when he followed trayvon .People including myself think it should be against the law depending on the circumstances, this is part of the issue.No martin didnt know zimmerman at all and zimmerman didnt know martin at all.

Except that's NOT what Martin did.

He got away out of Zimmerman's sight & then decided to come back on the offense when Zimmerman was leaving. Zimmerman's initial decision to follow Martin may not have been right, but Martin was given a chance to save his own life & leave. Nothing he did was self-defense the moment Zimmerman had lost him & was leaving b/c he was no longer a threat to Martin.

I know that but I dont believe it, and apparently a lot of people dont. Considering how much zimmerman changed the story and how little sense it makes that martin would attack him after running away( especially taking into consideration the conversation he had with his friend while zimmerman was following him) , its understandable to me that people dont believe him.But considering we are lacking evidence to prove otherwise we will have to deal with it, just like numerous other cases that defies all rationale but lacks evidence.

 

[arora]

I didn't ask if they knew each other, I asked if one knew the other was part of a neighborhood watch. You know, usually they have things like t-shirts, or magnets on their cars etc...

Hell, he could have even said "I am part of the neighborhood watch in this community"

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

I said he looked like a normal civilian already. I figured you read that.He didnt mention he was part of the neighborhood watch, or at least he never said he did.

 

[Mikeybc]

The stand your ground law is essentially the self defense law in florida.


Thats not what I meant at all.If george wouldnt have followed him george wouldnt have needed to defend himself in the first place.The moment he followed him, he put both of them in danger.


Once again he initiated the attack by following him, im not saying trayvon beating him up was right at all.Im saying they both should be held equally accountable.Like I said if trayvon killed him, chances are he wouldve got off free from killing zimmerman.More than likely the story would have been totally different because it would have been from his perspective.
A speech MLK made that was in relevance with the case and the question of profiling was brought up..Whats the issue with that?



Should I list the numerous things zimmerman should have done prior to the altercation? If the story is true then zimmerman had the right to kill him, how ever this isnt the point.The point is he approached trayvon and trayvon felt threatened.Why would trayvon just attack him for no reason ?


He was getting out the car when they said dont follow him.. You can hear the seat belt coming off when the dispatcher said he dont need to follow him.

It was approximately 15 seconds that had passed after he got out if his truck to when the dispatcher asked if he was flowing him and said we don't need you to do that, plenty of time to run to where he said he was in his reenactment with the police.

Also the act of following someone is in no way initiating an attack.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

I think this is what happened; Trayvon Martin went to the store, bought his Skittles and ice tea, went through the property talking to his friend, Zimmerman spotted him, he went out and tackled Martin down, Martin tried fighting Zimmerman off, but as the gym owner said, he had .5/10, and he couldn't kill him, he pulled out his gun and shot. Sorry if it sounds run-on-ish. Anyway, I still think it had to do with race, since according to Zimmerman, there were two black males walking around. One of the black males were caught and Zimmerman thought Trayvon was one of them. It is obvious he tried to act all good cop and badass. He completely ignored the police's directions. And, almost if not all of the defense's witnesses were friends with Zimmerman, so they could have lied for him instead of backstabbing him. Lets be honest people. Put yourself in Trayvon's shoes. If you had went to buy some food and a drink, would your intentions be to kill somebody on purpose or to go on with your life? Also, I think that the defense made a fool of themselves, and they should be ashamed of themselves, which includes you Don West for making a joke out of a death which is likely a murder. As an anylist said 1 minute ago, I think he took it too far calling the prosecution "disgraceful". I am angry, upset, and disappointed with the jury and verdict.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The stand your ground law is essentially the self defense law in florida.

Thats not what I meant at all.If george wouldnt have followed him george wouldnt have needed to defend himself in the first place.The moment he followed him, he put both of them in danger.

Once again he initiated the attack by following him, im not saying trayvon beating him up was right at all.Im saying they both should be held equally accountable.Like I said if trayvon killed him, chances are he wouldve got off free from killing zimmerman.More than likely the story would have been totally different because it would have been from his perspective.
A speech MLK made that was in relevance with the case and the question of profiling was brought up..Whats the issue with that?

Should I list the numerous things zimmerman should have done prior to the altercation? If the story is true then zimmerman had the right to kill him, how ever this isnt the point.The point is he approached trayvon and trayvon felt threatened.Why would trayvon just attack him for no reason ?

I find this kind of thinking infuriating. They are by no means equally responsible. This is what should have happened with normal people involved.

Zimmerman doesn't listen to the dispatcher and goes looking for the kid, doesn't find him, decides to return to his car.
Kid sees Zimmerman and says, "Hey man, why you following me?".
Zimmerman says, "I'm the local neighbourhood watch guy, just keeping an eye on the neighbourhood"
Martin says, "Oh cool, I thought you were some creepy dude following me".
Zimmerman, "No just doing my job, you live around here?".
Martin says, "Yeah I live over ...blah blah blah...

Yes Zimmerman should have listened to the dispatcher, but he's not under any legal obligation to do so. This turned into a murder case when a punk decided to jump on top of and start beating on someone he didn't know, for no justifiable reason. The guy happened to have a gun and defended himself. Had he not had a gun and defended himself, Martin could have been on trial for murder himself.

Don't jump out of a bush and physically assault someone and it never would have happened.

 

[Mikeybc]

I think this is what happened; Trayvon Martin went to the store, bought his Skittles and ice tea, went through the property talking to his friend, Zimmerman spotted him, he went out and tackled Martin down, Martin tried fighting Zimmerman off, but as the gym owner said, he had .5/10, and he couldn't kill him, he pulled out his gun and shot. Sorry if it sounds run-on-ish. Anyway, I still think it had to do with race, since according to Zimmerman, there were two black males walking around. One of the black males were caught and Zimmerman thought Trayvon was one of them. It is obvious he tried to act all good cop and badass. He completely ignored the police's directions. And, almost if not all of the defense's witnesses were friends with Zimmerman, so they could have lied for him instead of backstabbing him. Lets be honest people. Put yourself in Trayvon's shoes. If you had went to buy some food and a drink, would your intentions be to kill somebody on purpose or to go on with your life? Also, I think that the defense made a fool of themselves, and they should be ashamed of themselves, which includes you Don West for making a joke out of a death which is likely a murder. As an anylist said 1 minute ago, I think he took it too far calling the prosecution "disgraceful". I am angry, upset, and disappointed with the jury and verdict.

A rather skewed interpretation of the evidence IMHO

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

It was approximately 15 seconds that had passed after he got out if his truck to when the dispatcher asked if he was flowing him and said we don't need you to do that, plenty of time to run to where he said he was in his reenactment with the police.

Also the act of following someone is in no way initiating an attack.

Yea your right I just listened to the 911 tape again he did get out the truck prior to the dispatcher advising him not to follow,its been almost a year since I listened to the tape.It wasn't nearly 15 seconds though it was around 5sec. which isnt enough time to get to where he was in the re-enactment.I think he even said he continued to walk away from the his truck after being advised not to, to get address numbers ( despite the visible address numbers all around him and not just down the alley).
The act of following someone in those settings does indicate an eminent attack in the eyes of the person thats being followed.
No one can say trayvons intentions when going to his family member house was to harm someone.He was being followed and felt like he needed to defend him self. But my point is that zimmerman shouldn't have followed him from the beginning.This would not have happened if zimmerman didn't follow him.

I find this kind of thinking infuriating. They are by no means equally responsible.
Yes Zimmerman should have listened to the dispatcher, but he's not under any legal obligation to do so. This turned into a murder case when a punk decided to jump on top of and start beating on someone he didn't know, for no justifiable reason. The guy happened to have a gun and defended himself. Had he not had a gun and defended himself, Martin could have been on trial for murder himself.
Don't jump out of a bush and physically assault someone and it never would have happened.

Why do you find it infuriating? George had no justifiable reason for following trayvon and trayvon had no justifiable reason to jump on zimmerman.It never would have happened if george didnt follow trayvon and he wouldn't have been killed if he didnt supposedly jump on george even though he jumped on george because he was following him.They both were wrong and should both be held accountable for their actions.If trayvon killed zimmerman what do you think would happen to trayvon?

Like I said all rational thought would say if trayvon ran away and got away he wouldn't have attacked because evidence shows that trayvon was trying to run away .We will have to take george word on it that he was attacked first, but if trayvon was alive and this was just a physical dispute, I have no doubt in my mind george would be locked up.

 

[oopssorryy]

I think....

How much of the case did you watch and how much time have you spent looking at it? That was the same veiw point I heard a year ago before and evidence was brought forth. The jury couldn't prove without a reasonable doubt that it was murder. Thus he walks. The men and wemon on that panel spent much more time looking and listening to the evidence than either you or I so I see no reason to disbelieve them until new evidence is brought to light.

 

[playnthru]

Yes he did have a justifiable reason for following. Trayvon was suspicion to him! That's all the justification Zimmerman needed... Zimmerman was well within his rights to do so!!!

The point you keep trying to make, is dis-proved.. Understand this yet??

If Trayvon survived Zimmerman would not be locked up? You are missing the fact Zimmerman was attacked here, even if Trayvon survived the evidence would still support that fact.

If Zimmerman attacked Martin where is that evidence??? It does not exist because it did not happen that way.

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

How much of the case did you watch and how much time have you spent looking at it? That was the same veiw point I heard a year ago before and evidence was brought forth. The jury couldn't prove without a reasonable doubt that it was murder. Thus he walks. The men and wemon on that panel spent much more time looking and listening to the evidence than either you or I so I see no reason to disbelieve them until new evidence is brought to light.

I dont think they could prove it was manslaughter either.I thought it would have been considered manslaughter simply based on the actions leading up to the altercation.Thats what im confused about.I'm hearing people say he was and wasn't charged with manslaughter so I dont know if he actually was.

 

[arora]

I said he looked like a normal civilian already. I figured you read that.He didnt mention he was part of the neighborhood watch, or at least he never said he did.

In other words, you don't know the answer to my question. Perhaps no one does, we have those watch groups where I live and anyone who lives around here and pays 1/2 an ass'd attention knows when someone is patrolling in that capacity.

I can't answer the question myself as I've not really followed the case very closely.

__________


I live on a cul de sac and I usually pay close attention to my neighbors, their friends, and whoever else might come around. I've chased quite a few clowns away with out death or violence I have to admit. It goes like this, in a polite manner as I see unusual traffic, "Hello, how's it going? Do you need help? are you lost?" Things of that sort, you can spot em a mile away and these are typical responses, they run away, or, they say no thank you and leave, they say f you man and still run away, they are polite and say, I'm lost do you know xyz?

We watch out for each other where I live 👍

 

[Touring Mars]

Yes he did have a justifiable reason for following. Trayvon was suspicion to him! That's all the justification Zimmerman needed... Zimmerman was well within his rights to do so!!!

It sounds to me like Zimmerman was being over-zealous in his assumed duties as a neighbourhood watchman, and when he sought the support of law enforcement, he made the somewhat inexplicable decision to ignore their directions i.e. to stop following Martin. Of course, Martin had every right to be on the estate - but Zimmerman apparently just assumed that he didn't - but he was quite wrong about that.

Zimmerman may have thought he was doing the clever thing by following someone who he perceived to be up to no good, but he had neither the authority or anything beyond pure suspicion to 'justify' his behaviour. Even if his suspicions were well founded and Martin was up to no good (and that is by no means certain), he still should not have ignored the police advice to back off. The question is, how on Earth was Martin, whose presence on the estate was justified, supposed to know who Zimmerman was or why he was following him - and not being a police officer, it would not be apparent from his appearance that Zimmerman himself was not up to no good. Being followed or approached by a complete stranger in a hostile manner is frightening and intimidating, and this is most likely why the police advised Zimmerman not to do it.

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

In other words, you don't know the answer to my question. Perhaps no one does, we have those watch groups where I live and anyone who lives around here and pays 1/2 an ass'd attention knows when someone is patrolling in that capacity.

I can't answer the question myself as I've not really followed the case very closely.

__________

I answered your question.There was no indication that trayvon knew he was a neighborhood watchman because he looked a normal civilian, Zimmerman did not announce to trayvon he was a neighborhood watchman.Is this not the answer to what your asking?

Yes he did have a justifiable reason for following. Trayvon was suspicion to him! That's all the justification Zimmerman needed... Zimmerman was well within his rights to do so!!!

The point you keep trying to make, is dis-proved.. Understand this yet??

If Trayvon survived Zimmerman would not be locked up? You are missing the fact Zimmerman was attacked here, even if Trayvon survived the evidence would still support that fact.

If Zimmerman attacked Martin where is that evidence??? It does not exist because it did not happen that way.

The fact he suspected him of wrong doing because of previous activities by people of color in the neighborhood is not only profiling but racial profiling ( even if it was caucasians breaking into houses and if trayvon was caucasian it would still be racial profiling), if you believe thats reason to follow a kid then thats your opinion but it encroaches on civil rights.

 

[Northstar]

The fact he suspected him of wrong doing because of previous activities by people of color in the neighborhood is not only profiling but racial profiling ( even if it was caucasians breaking into houses and if trayvon was caucasian it would still be racial profiling), if you believe thats reason to follow a kid then thats your opinion but it encroaches on civil rights.

There is nothing wrong with profiling withing reason(I also don't see how it violates any civil rights). For instance, I work at a grocery store and I tend to keep a closer eye on a group of teens than I would some couple in their 30's as teens shoplift more. It goes the other way as well as a couple in their 30's is much more likely to write a bad check than a group of teens(granted teens don't usually use checks but that's not the point).

 

[Nessy]

Off topic and maybe questionably edited, but i'll leave this here.

 

[arora]

I answered your question.There was no indication that trayvon knew he was a neighborhood watchman because he looked a normal civilian, Zimmerman did not announce to trayvon he was a neighborhood watchman.Is this not the answer to what your asking?

No it is not the answer I was looking for, and no, you do not know if he knew or not.

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

There is nothing wrong with profiling withing reason(I also don't see how it violates any civil rights). For instance, I work at a grocery store and I tend to keep a closer eye on a group of teens than I would some couple in their 30's as teens shoplift more. It goes the other way as well as a couple in their 30's is much more likely to write a bad check than a group of teens(granted teens don't usually use checks but that's not the point).

I agree with this,how ever I didnt say it flat out violated his civil rights I said it encroaches on it like every other racial profile situation, until theres physical action based on the racial profile there is no violation of civil rights.I'm not sure rather following him would mean taking action or not.I think thats one of the things thats being debated

No it is not the answer I was looking for, and no, you do not know if he knew or not.

Well I dont get your question.According to george's re-enactment and the 911 call he never told trayvon he was a part of the neighborhood watch and his truck doesn't appear to have any badges, and based on trayvon's phone call with his friend he didnt know george was a part of the neighborhood watch. Could you re-word your question?

 

[MisterWhiskers]

Yes he did have a justifiable reason for following. Trayvon was suspicion to him! That's all the justification Zimmerman needed... Zimmerman was well within his rights to do so!!!

A kid with a food and a drink is suspicious? He does not have the right to kill him!

How much of the case did you watch and how much time have you spent looking at it? That was the same veiw point I heard a year ago before and evidence was brought forth. The jury couldn't prove without a reasonable doubt that it was murder. Thus he walks. The men and wemon on that panel spent much more time looking and listening to the evidence than either you or I so I see no reason to disbelieve them until new evidence is brought to light.

I have seen most of the case. I have seen enough evidence from the prosecution, like the DNA analysis, to prove that Zimmerman was a cold-blooded killer.

 

[Mikeybc]

The DNA analysis didn't prove anything. According to experts there would have been a gap between the 2 layers of clothing and martins skin due to him leaning forward which evidence clearly shows he would have been doing when he was shot, quite possible to shoot at close quarters and not have Martins DNA on the gun barrel.

 

[arora]

Good enough Dmarc_Atl. 👍

I've just not seen anything specifically mentioned about it. How do you live in a neighborhood and walk back and forth to stores and such, go in and out of a gate and just think "there is some creepy dude following me for no reason" There is more to it I have to think.

It doesn't really mater atm, guy was found not guilty, a home owners association or something similar has already payed out cash(which is lame), and there will probably be more law suits.

Last time I walked to the store and bought some candy and whatever, I was not creepy followed, didn't hide in a bush, didn't get in a fight. Trouble finds you when you are in the wrong I have found in my life.

 

[a6m5]

I answered your question.There was no indication that trayvon knew he was a neighborhood watchman because he looked a normal civilian, Zimmerman did not announce to trayvon he was a neighborhood watchman.Is this not the answer to what your asking?

That's beside the point though.

1) Zimmerman had the right to follow a suspicious character. 2) 911(reportedly) did not have the authority to order Zimmerman to back off. 3) Martin did not have the right to attack Zimmerman, unless in self-defense(which they failed to prove).

People do watch & approach suspicious character all the time, especially when these characters are kids. It's not like it happened often, but I remember it happening to me as a young kid in Japan, and as a young man in America. It could be at some neighborhood, apartment, property, or some facility, I've been stalked and/or approached by nosy characters before. My reply always was that I was visiting somebody, or taking a shortcut. I never got in any trouble, and even if I was thinking "you are an 🤬", I never engaged these people with hostility.

A kid with a food and a drink is suspicious? He does not have the right to kill him!

I'm not even going to reply to this comment, because it's just nonsensical & total disrespect to the case & everyone involved, but it sets up what I wanted to bring up perfectly: My local news channel commented on viewers posting their reaction to the verdict on their website, and most were in disbelief how Zimmerman got away with murder. Most of the comments they shared depicted the incident as a armed madman stalking a child, then murdering him.

Obviously, they have very little to ZERO knowledge about the case outside one guy shooting another guy. I mean, not many people are happy with the outcome, myself included. But again, the media has done a great job of selling this story, getting so many people worked up about a case they don't even understand.

 

[playnthru]

It sounds to me like Zimmerman was being over-zealous in his assumed duties as a neighbourhood watchman, and when he sought the support of law enforcement, he made the somewhat inexplicable decision to ignore their directions i.e. to stop following Martin. Of course, Martin had every right to be on the estate - but Zimmerman apparently just assumed that he didn't - but he was quite wrong about that.

Zimmerman may have thought he was doing the clever thing by following someone who he perceived to be up to no good, but he had neither the authority or anything beyond pure suspicion to 'justify' his behaviour. Even if his suspicions were well founded and Martin was up to no good (and that is by no means certain), he still should not have ignored the police advice to back off. The question is, how on Earth was Martin, whose presence on the estate was justified, supposed to know who Zimmerman was or why he was following him - and not being a police officer, it would not be apparent from his appearance that Zimmerman himself was not up to no good. Being followed or approached by a complete stranger in a hostile manner is frightening and intimidating, and this is most likely why the police advised Zimmerman not to do it.

To answer your question. All he had to do was ask! Who are you, why are following me?

Instead he choose. YOU GOT A PROBLEM 🤬! YOU GOT ONE NOW, BAM! Fight's on, Zimmerman had to defend himself.

All the evidence supports Zimmerman's story. All 911 calls support Zimmerman's story. Why do you think the all women jury agreed. Please don't tell me you're buying the race story? That's so darn phony, the media made this about race.

If you listen to the whole 911 call you'll hear why Zimmerman thought Martin was suspicious in the first place, he was looking into windows. Zimmerman only mentioned race when asked by the 911 operator what color the suspect was.

 

[Dmarc_Atl]

That's beside the point though.

1) Zimmerman had the right to follow a suspicious character. 2) 911(reportedly) did not have the authority to order Zimmerman to back off. 3) Martin did not have the right to attack Zimmerman, unless in self-defense(which they failed to prove).

People do watch & approach suspicious character all the time, especially when these characters are kids. It's not like it happened often, but I remember it happening to me as a young kid in Japan, and as a young man in America. It could be at some neighborhood, apartment, property, or some facility, I've been stalked and/or approached by nosy characters before. My reply always was that I was visiting somebody, or taking a shortcut. I never got in any trouble, and even if I was thinking "you are an 🤬", I never engaged these people with hostility.

1.Yes he had the right because he's free to do what ever he wants.Im not doubting, however I am saying it is wrong.You can call me racist names all day because you have freedom of speech but it is still wrong.
2.I stated that already so I dont really get why your saying this?
3.Its hard to prove a case for a dead person.If trayvon did indeed attack george first I think that was a dumb move, and kids do dumb things sometimes.I can say depending on my mood I would have approached zimmerman with intentions to see what he wants and if the situation prompted, fight.But this isnt the point.Martin wouldnt have had the intentions of fighting if zimmerman wasnt following him in the first place.
Bringing up the fact he's a kid is a moot point considering george thought he was grown.
You know whats funny? I remember being followed when I was a kid by 2 grown men in broad day light, then they proceeded to check my pockets while 3 other guys come out of no where and proceeded to rob me.The way you react to certain situations depends on how and where you are brought up, thats why I can understand if martin was thinking fight mode.Because after I got robbed my entire mentality changed.When a random person approach me im always prepared to retreat or fight.

To answer your question. All he had to do was ask! Who are you, why are following me?

Instead he choose. YOU GOT A PROBLEM 🤬! YOU GOT ONE NOW, BAM! Fight's on, Zimmerman had to defend himself.

All the evidence supports Zimmerman's story. All 911 calls support Zimmerman's story. Why do you think the all women jury agreed. Please don't tell me you're buying the race story? That's so darn phony, the media made this about race.

If you listen to the whole 911 call you'll hear why Zimmerman thought Martin was suspicious in the first place, he was looking into windows. Zimmerman only mentioned race when asked by the 911 operator what color the suspect was.

When I listen to the phone call I hear a neighborhood watchman trying to be a police officer :/. All the evidence doesnt support zimmerman story.The lack of evidence supports his story.

 

[Touring Mars]

To answer your question. All he had to do was ask! Who are you, why are following me?

The onus was on Zimmerman to make it clear who he was and why he was making Martin's movements his business.

Instead he choose. YOU GOT A PROBLEM 🤬! YOU GOT ONE NOW, BAM! Fight's on, Zimmerman had to defend himself.

You are speculating, as no-one knows how the initial contact between Zimmerman and Martin played out. Alot is being made of Zimmerman's right to defend himself, but Martin had a right to defend himself too, except he wasn't carrying any weapons...

If you listen to the whole 911 call you'll hear why Zimmerman thought Martin was suspicious in the first place, he was looking into windows.

Not in the recordings I'm listening to... "Walking around, looking about" and "Looking at all the houses" is what Zimmerman actually said, as well as "f---ing punks" - but when he says these things, it's clearly a live commentary on Martin's movements within the last few seconds as opposed to a report of some clearly suspect actions, like actually trying a door or a window, or accosting someone. It's clear that Zimmerman is convinced that Martin is a criminal (with little in the way of supporting evidence to justify that attitude) and it doesn't seem to have occured to him that Martin was actually innocent and on his way home to a property just yards away from when Zimmerman took an interest in him.

 

[a6m5]

1.Yes he had the right because he's free to do what ever he wants.Im not doubting, however I am saying it is wrong.You can call me racist names all day because you have freedom of speech but it is still wrong.

No offense, but it's way out of line to compare racisim with following a suspicious character you suspect is up to no good. As I stated in my last post, I've been followed or approached by nosy people before. This isn't some isolated case, it happens all the time in this world. And as I noted in that post, I wasn't always flattered by it, but I never attacked anyone over it either. It's always been: 1) They ask 2) I explain 3) We both walk away

2.I stated that already so I dont really get why your saying this?

I wasn't challenging you on any particular detail, it was in response to your post questioning if Martin was aware that Zimmerman was a watchman.

3.Its hard to prove a case for a dead person.If trayvon did indeed attack george first I think that was a dumb move, and kids do dumb things sometimes.I can say depending on my mood I would have approached zimmerman with intentions to see what he wants and if the situation prompted, fight.

I understand, and I also question it. However, prosecution failed to disprove that Zimmerman was acting in self-defense. We can debate all day long about the what if's, but they looked at the available evidences and it did not begin to prove that Zimmerman murdered Martin that night. We simply do not have enough evidence to debate this further.

But this isnt the point.Martin wouldnt have had the intentions of fighting if zimmerman wasnt following him in the first place.

Again, beside the point. Take it from a guy who think Zimmerman should have backed off when it was brought up by the 911. That argument is like accusing someone of driving too fast on the freeway. If you think it's too fast on the freeway, get the government to change the speed limit, we can't blame the driver for doing the speed limit.

You know whats funny? I remember being followed when I was a kid by 2 grown men in broad day light, then they proceeded to check my pockets while 3 other guys come out of no where and proceeded to rob me.The way you react to certain situations depends on how and where you are brought up, thats why I can understand if martin was thinking fight mode.Because after I got robbed my entire mentality changed.When a random person approach me im always prepared to retreat or fight.

I'm sorry that happened to you, but I can't go along there either. I've never been robbed, and I hope it stays that way, but I carry a knife. If I get nervous, I "check" that knife, preparing myself to whip it out & open it. However, I am not going to jump a guy and stab him. If I get jumped without a warning, then, yes, odds of me cutting or stabbing someone increases by quite a bit. Again, if you just follow me, ask me what I was doing there, I am not even close to attacking you, or even being rude to you.