17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

[ScooterSissy]

Oldgringo,

It's been 60 something pages (I think) since i felt compelled to comment.

As I said back then, "stupid is not illegal". And I thank God for that or I would have been put away decades ago. GZ's head "belonged" anywhere he was legally allowed to be. It was HIS neighborhood, he was neighborhood watch (whatever extra responsibility that entails) and he was observing and reporting. That much is established fact.

Was it a tactical error? Certainly, hindsight being 20/20 but if I were to try and imagine myself in GZ's shoes, I would not necessarily see it as a tactical error at the time. This given the notation that TM was "suspicious" not violent at the time GZ saw him. Also, and I'd bet a soda that GZ knew this, an overwhelming majority of "suspicious" types will cease whatever they're doing once they know they are being observed and that would motivate some of us to do just what GZ did, let the guy know he was being watched and call 911.

Now whatever TM's state of intoxication was, instead of going on about HIS business getting to where he "belonged" (or for that matter verbally challenging GZ) he opted to violently engage GZ and now he's dead and another man's life is ruined for all intents and purposes.

Many, many responses on this thread reiterate that yes, getting out of the car was a tactical error and I agree...in hindsight. But this trend in placing blame for the incident on a man doing what was legal and going above the norm in watching his neighborhood is truly disturbing. May you never have to answer for a mistake like George Zimmerman and may you not be blamed as you and many others have done. As for me, "There, but for the grace of God, go I."

@psijac - I would contend that getting out of the car proves nothing in the way of criminality on GZ's part. The FACT that TM is dead with a bullet from GZ's weapon proves homicide, but the criminality (if any) lives elsewhere.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. You've said exactly what I've been thinking far better than I've been able to (especially the "this trend in placing blame for the incident on a man doing what was legal and going above the norm in watching his neighborhood is truly disturbing" part, with my emphasis on "disturbing").

[speedsix]

...I don't know how one could say that they were navigating the legal system by themselves...with all that money and a lawyer...seems like they could get good legal advice...but then they'd have had to spend more of that money on what it was donated for...perish the thought...

What was the money donated for? Do you remember the simple web site that was put up? Can't say that I do, other than I remember it was very sparse on details as to what it was to be used for...

...more of those pesky facts... http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/04/ge ... erman.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(be sure to note the "...only for living expenses and legal defense..." part...)

[ScooterSissy]

...I don't know how one could say that they were navigating the legal system by themselves...with all that money and a lawyer...seems like they could get good legal advice...but then they'd have had to spend more of that money on what it was donated for...perish the thought...

What was the money donated for? Do you remember the simple web site that was put up? Can't say that I do, other than I remember it was very sparse on details as to what it was to be used for...

...more of those pesky facts... http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/04/ge ... erman.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(be sure to note the "...only for living expenses and legal defense..." part...)

Thanks, it's not really the website, that's long since gone, but it does provide some information on what was on the website. From the "facts" you gave us:

I have created a Paypal account solely linked on this website as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. I will also personally, maintain accountability of all funds received. I reassure you, every donation is appreciated.

I haven't seen anything that doesn't fall under "living expenses", have you?

I'll repeat, I thought the site was pretty sparse when I saw it. Nothing that would have compelled me to donate for sure. But, when someone says "send me money for living expenses & legal expenses because I can't work" (yep, a paraphrase, but that's essentially what he said), that's a pretty open ended plea.

[speedsix]

...well, if you don't like the verbatim copy of his website that I was able to drudge up, maybe you could step up and do your own research...there's a novel approach...I was just responding to refresh your memory since you seemed concerned that legal expenses might not have been what it was donated for...I've answered that "challenge"...now you want to take off on another tangent...seems the facts don't suit you... PLEASE chase your own rabbits...

[Keith B]

OK folks, keep it civil in your dicussions.

[ScooterSissy]

...well, if you don't like the verbatim copy of his website that I was able to drudge up, maybe you could step up and do your own research...there's a novel approach...I was just responding to refresh your memory since you seemed concerned that legal expenses might not have been what it was donated for...I've answered that "challenge"...now you want to take off on another tangent...seems the facts don't suit you... PLEASE chase your own rabbits...

Huh???? I used your quote - verbatim. I'm not quibbling whether or not he said "legal expenses", I'm saying that wasn't all he said. He also said "living expenses", and also stated that he had no job. So, if he's using the money for living expenses because he's unemployed, what's yer beef?

My "tangent" really wasn't one. I got the impression from reading the web site when it was up that it was a pretty open ended plea for money, and one I didn't really care to donate to. Your facts did exactly what you said you wanted them to - they refreshed my memory. It was a pretty open ended plea for money.

[BKRushing]

...refreshingly accurate, clear-headed, and well put...welcome to the forum...this may be the best post in all these many pages!!! You've got my vote!!!

If that welcome was for me, thanks. Lots of good info here on the forum. Loving my stay so far.

[speedsix]

...for those who would like to see "really the website"...here's a picture...with the same "facts" as I posted above... which provided "some information"

http://www.thelantern.com/campus/george ... -1.2843940" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and another, full-screen image... http://www.google.com/imgres?q=image+of ... 4,s:0,i:86" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...they had a lawyer...they had PLENTY of money...given for their legal expenses...they weren't "navigating the legal system by themselves..." ...they could have told the truth to the judge and paid a fair bond, surrendered the passport that they kept hidden, and he'd still be out on bond...with plenty left over for living expenses...they just don't want to play by the rules...and the bank/credit union records proved it...these aren't a couple of innocent waifs, caught up in a confusing legal system...they're a couple of lying scam artists...and they got caught...

[The Annoyed Man]

...I don't know how one could say that they were navigating the legal system by themselves...with all that money and a lawyer...seems like they could get good legal advice...but then they'd have had to spend more of that money on what it was donated for...perish the thought...

What was the money donated for? Do you remember the simple web site that was put up? Can't say that I do, other than I remember it was very sparse on details as to what it was to be used for...

I remember it, because I donated to it. It was a specific request for donations to raise money for legal defense.....nothing more.

[ScooterSissy]

...I don't know how one could say that they were navigating the legal system by themselves...with all that money and a lawyer...seems like they could get good legal advice...but then they'd have had to spend more of that money on what it was donated for...perish the thought...

What was the money donated for? Do you remember the simple web site that was put up? Can't say that I do, other than I remember it was very sparse on details as to what it was to be used for...

I remember it, because I donated to it. It was a specific request for donations to raise money for legal defense.....nothing more.

Actually, as has been pointed out by Speedsix, it was for legal defense and living expenses.

...any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment

[speedsix]

...notice the promise to use the donations for living expenses and legal expenses...not to squirrel it away and hide it from the judge...OOPS... http://www.google.com/imgres?q=image+of ... 4,s:0,i:86" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...the "real" George Zimmerman??? Alrighty...

[ScooterSissy]

...notice the promise to use the donations for living expenses and legal expenses...not to squirrel it away and hide it from the judge...OOPS... http://www.google.com/imgres?q=image+of ... 4,s:0,i:86" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...the "real" George Zimmerman??? Alrighty...

Actually, the term he used was "legal defense", not expenses - but then, he had a pretty squirrly use of the word "in lieu of" as well. However you're right, he didn't say he was going to squirrel it away and hide it from the judge - but then he didn't say he was going to offer up the entire amount for bail either.

Regardless of whether or not he was hiding it from the judge, I still don't see where he's not using it for what he promised. It would appear that you're bothered by the fact that folks gave him money... Personally, I'm not. Like I said, he didn't get any of mine, the web site looked pretty suspicious to me from the get go.

[speedsix]

...the minute I hit send, I knew I was going to have somebody grab at the difference between "defense" and "expenses"...nit-picking and playing the words are about all that can be done when hit with the truth...kinda petty, doncha think? but when that's all ya got.... the meaning was clear...money for legal defense and money for legal expenses is the same thing...pretty poor point of dispute...

...he was really interested in using it for his living expenses...and paying off his credit cards...to the point he and his wife worked hard to hide it...he's just not willing to use it to honestly pay a fair bond...a "legal defense" expense that he promised the good folks that donated he'd use it on...I could care less that they gave him money...and I don't know how "...It would appear that " I'm "bothered"...nothing posted says that...it's an unfounded conclusion that's being jumped to....but he and his wife are not acting in the same "good faith" that the donors acted in...they didn't give them the money to lie about and hide...maybe it'll be used as promised from now on, since they have someone else controlling it now...

[smoothoperator]

If it's tied up in bail or gone for a bail bondsman fee he can't use it to pay his lawyer. Maybe that's exactly what some people want.

[speedsix]

...since a bail bondsman usually asks 10% cash and they ended up with around 200K...I'll bet he can bond out...if the judge gives him another chance...of course, his credit cards might have to stay maxed out awhile longer...I don't wanna hear "poor George" any time soon!!! http://www.myradionetwork.net/204000-do ... an-defense" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;