17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

[mamabearCali]

Then what is the point of your argument? To say that Zimmerman was somewhat stupid--I'll grant that. What I won't grant is that he caused a person to beat him up by being present outside his car in his own neighborhood. Zimmerman had just as much right to be there as Martin. His stupidity does not excuse Mr. Martins criminality in his assault on Zimmerman.

As for his side of the story vs the truth. Generally, among the non-criminal sorts, people under stress usually are not good liars. They don't come up with good stories. As I have no reason to think him a liar and we have no evidence to the contrary at this point I tend to go with the idea that he was telling the truth, at least from his point of view. What Martin POV was we will never know, but that was of his own doing. You choose to use your fists instead of your phone (to call the police) bad things happen.

[ScooterSissy]

...I never said that it was an illegal act...I DID say that a person doing what he knew better than to do to the point that another person became afraid of him and ran started the whole problem...

Except there's nothing (other than speculation) to indicate that Marin was "afraid of him". To the contrary, a person afraid would surely run home, or maybe even call 911. The thing a person afraid would surely not do is circle around and confront the person he/she fears, and then begin bashing his head on the pavement.

As was already stated, you can blame Zimmerman all you want, but had Martin simply continued home, this would never have happened. He didn't. Apparently, what he did instead was attack Zimmerman, and Zimmerman defended himself.

[Beiruty]

The prosecutor of GZ was asked " Do you have an evidence who started the fight? Who did throw the first punch?" Prosecutor: "No!"

[mamabearCali]

The prosecutor of GZ was asked " Do you have an evidence who started the fight? Who did throw the first punch?" Prosecutor: "No!"

Yeah if he has no evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight I have no idea how he is even charged with anything. If all he has got is speculation with no basis in evidence or testimony The charge should read "Locked up for political reasons and to appease a mob"

[smoothoperator]

It most certainly did not. That it didn't was stated outright by Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz on national television --a liberal, but apparently an honest one. Furthermore, he called the prosecutor "irresponsible" and "unethical." Your evaluation of it also doesn't square with the fact that it is full of outright lies and gross misrepresentations. This isn't "due process" either, since the normal process was overturned for political reasons, with an obviously directed outcome. Satisfying the mob isn't due process.

On what day did you and Mr. Dershowitz interview the witnesses and review the evidence collected at the scene and elsewhere?

When did you stop beating your wife?



It's not necessary to conduct an independent investigation. An affidavit submitted by an honest, competent person is self-contained. It would include all the information necessary for the judge to make a ruling whether to proceed.

Alan Dershowitz claims it didn't. You claim it does. We know his history as a lawyer and law professor. What are your qualifications?

[speedsix]

A. the reports we got on this early on may have come from news articles, the police, or a link posted here...but they were given to us...and the prosecutor evidently dreamed the same dream...for it to be in the affidavit...it wouldn't have been any more or less true if you had seen it...it was part of the information we've been given...we'll find out if it was true or false in the trial, I'm sure...

...if an average person sees a suspicious person on the street of their neighborhood, it's normal that they would call in and report it to the police...

....it is NOT normal that they would leave the safety of their vehicle, and begin to follow that individual through the neighborhood...pursuing to the point that they alarmed that person and he began to run from him...and the advice from most normal people would be not to do that, and that you had no need, responsibility, or authority to do that...
...if you had been specifically trained NOT to do that...it would be even MORE not normal if you did it...

...he did wrong...and he started the whole problem...had he done what he was trained to do...Martin would have had no contact with him, nor he with Martin...it's so simple that a child could understand it...

My problem with the way you keep "presenting" things is that you keep throwing in little "extras". What do you mean he had no "authority". It was his gated community. He had just as much "authority" to be in a public area as Martin did.
A. put "authority" back in the context I used it in and what I posted answers your question...
As for the rest, I challenge you to show a single police report that stated Zimmerman chased Martin. I don't doubt for a minute that you read it somewhere, but that doesn't make it so. Much like the racial slurs that were, then weren't uttered; much like the "he looks black" that was profiling, then turned out to be in response to a direct question; there are lots that many of us read that have since proven to be untrue.
A. you'll have to "challenge" the prosecutor on that one...he's the one who put it on the affidavit...the trial will hopefully prove out whether it's so or not...
Plus, you keep talking about "training". What training? I've not read that Zimmerman had any special "training" (though he might have). What I have read is that there was an attempt to start a neighborhood watch, and he was the only one that volunteered. It's interesting that when the media wanted to portray him as a vigilante, they stated many times that he was a "self-appointed neighborhood watch leader".
A. if you'll google Sanford FL Neighborhood Watch Program, you can read their handbook and see what they teach...those who want to support him also say that he "wasn't on duty"...ignoring that he'd tacitly agreed to follow their rules when he decided to affiliate with them as a "Captain"...
I'll keep repeating. There's nothing indicating he did anything illegal at all. There's plenty indicating that Martin bashed his head against the pavement. That is what got Martin shot. It wasn't being in the neighborhood (or Zimmerman would have surely fired when it was safer), it wasn't being followed (again, that would have been an opportune time to shoot, if that was the motive), and it wasn't because of a confrontationg (or Zimmerman would have drawn and fired before being on the the ground on his back).

A. You can't stop coming back to "illegal"...and that has nothing to do with what I've said...there's a world of difference between illegal and wrong...as to the rest...I'm not addressing what happened later...that's way past what I'm talking about...

[speedsix]

...my final post on this thread( hear the cheers and laughter)...

...legal or illegal are easily determined by reading the written laws...

...when Z got out of his vehicle and followed M...nothing we've been shown on this thread even hints that he did anything illegal( up to the point whatever happened between him and M happened)...it's not illegal to get out of your vehicle and walk on the street, and I haven't hinted that it was...

...as humans, especially as men...responsible citizens...most of us govern our own actions by not only laws, but by our understanding of right and wrong...based on what we've learned, what our family has taught us, what our particular society views as right and wrong...and our life experiences have something to do with arriving at what's right or wrong for us...

...Z had voluntarily come under the guidelines of the NW program and agreed tacitly to obey them...the handbook explained clearly what he should/should not do...having this knowledge, he chose to go contrary to what he'd agreed to do and, in doing so, put another individual in fear to the point that the person ran from him...(after having done all that was necessary...making a call to those whose job it was to follow and question suspicious people...)...and look where we are today...look at the impact his decisions have made on how many people across the country...

...after making his call to the police, he should have just gone his way and minded his own business...and I wonder how many nights he's wished that he had...

...a public forum's not for us to all come to agreement...it is to share our views of a subject, argue, persuade, etc...but agreement is not as important as some make it...so that we don't agree means little to me...what matters to me is that I've taught my three sons to observe suspicious things in the neighborhood, take notes, call it in , and let it alone unless it comes to our house...and my boys won't ever do what Z did...my mission is accomplished...

[ScooterSissy]

A. You can't stop coming back to "illegal"...and that has nothing to do with what I've said...there's a world of difference between illegal and wrong...as to the rest...I'm not addressing what happened later...that's way past what I'm talking about...

First of all, that's not all I keep "coming back to"; but I keep coming back to it for a very important reason.

Zimmerman is charged with a crime. If he did nothing illegal when he was attacked, then he committed no crime.

But, you ignored the other things I offered up.
What training did Zimmerman have? (please provide sources, not speculation)
Why did a 17 year old that was "afraid" circle back and confront?
Why is that confrontation not the real problem here?
What "authority" did Zimmerman require to follow a suspicious person in his gated community? (c'mon now, you brought up the "authority" issue)
What authority does anyone need to follow someone who they deem suspicious, especially when they've got 911 folks on the phone?

[smoothoperator]

...when Z got out of his vehicle and followed M...nothing we've been shown on this thread even hints that he did anything illegal( up to the point whatever happened between him and M happened)...it's not illegal to get out of your vehicle and walk on the street, and I haven't hinted that it was...

The man who physically attacked the other man is the one who committed a crime. Maybe that's the man in custody. Maybe that's the man in the ground. I don't know and I'm suspicious of those who say they do.

...what matters to me is that I've taught my three sons to observe suspicious things in the neighborhood, take notes, call it in , and let it alone unless it comes to our house...and my boys won't ever do what Z did...my mission is accomplished...

I hope you also taught them not to steal, not to do drugs, not to bring drugs into their school, and not to do a lot of other stupid things.

[mamabearCali]

...my final post on this thread( hear the cheers and laughter)......

Awwww....and we were just starting to have fun, I imagine all of us have learned not to, under any circumstances, leave our cars if we see a suspicios person. As long as we all additionally teach our children not to engage a person we think is following us with our fists all will be better off.

[Beiruty]

I hope you also taught them not to steal, not to do drugs, not to bring drugs into their school, and not to do a lot of other stupid things

I teach all of that and not to be deceptive, liar, cheater, sneaky, fraudulent, and top it off, I teach my 10yr+ kids to pray 5 times a day! Love mosques, love your community, be generous and helpful whenever you can.

[stroo]

speedsix,
You are confusing tactically wrong with morally wrong. It was tactically wrong for Z to get out of his truck. He however had every moral right to get out of his truck and go for a walk in his neighborhood. He had every moral right to be a better witness and find out where the suspicious kid was going. Whatever his training, it was tactical training that he was breaking not some kind of moral law.

Would Martin be alive if Z didn't follow him. Probably. But then Martin would also be alive if he had gone home instead of confronting Z.

However neither was morally wrong until one or the other started the fight. And apparently the only evidence we have on that is Z's testimony given that the charging officer testified in court today that the prosecution had no evidence to contradict Z's account. Z's testimony pretty clearly says that Martin started the fight. At that point, he was in the moral wrong.

[Dragonfighter]

speedsix,
<SNIP>

However neither was morally wrong until one or the other started the fight. And apparently the only evidence we have on that is Z's testimony given that the charging officer testified in court today that the prosecution had no evidence to contradict Z's account. Z's testimony pretty clearly says that Martin started the fight. At that point, he was in the moral wrong.

And legally wrong. Well said.

[baldeagle]

...because he was a Neighborhood Watch captain...and he had been trained NOT to follow,chase, or confront...merely to observe and report...making NO contact with a suspicious person...that is why it was wrong for him for sure...and only MIGHT have been wrong for someone not trained in that manner...it has nothing to do with his carrying under CHL...it's all about him doing what he knew not to do...thereby creating the whole situation wherein a confrontation and the events following could play out....

Do you have some insight into his training? Please share it with us, because I haven't seen it.

[baldeagle]

There is a two minute thirty second gap between Zimmerman hanging up his call to the police dispatcher and the first 911 call. It takes about 45 seconds to a minute to walk from where Zimmerman last saw Martin to Martin's father's girl friend's house. So how did Martin end up a mere 35 yards from Zimmerman's truck and twice that distance from the house? Either he ran a short distance then waited or he doubled back. Nothing else makes sense to me. Why did Martin do this? I have no idea, but it was an action at least as stupid and wrong as Zimmerman's leaving his car. http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/ ... -testimony" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think we can all agree this is a terrible tragedy. Beyond that, we simply don't know. There's not enough facts available to make an informed decision about who committed a crime that night. (And surely a crime was committed. Either Zimmerman is guilty of murder or manslaughter or Martin is guilty of assault.)