Reexamining the Trayvon Martin Shooting

Pages: 1 2 3

The shooting of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin has seen the media at its sensationalist worst. Press reports have cast Martin’s shooter, George Zimmerman, as a trigger-happy vigilante looking to make trouble where there was none. Attached to this storyline has been the charged subtext that Zimmerman acted out of racial prejudice, confronting Martin simply because the latter was black. Not surprisingly, this media-made version of the shooting has roiled racial passions across the country, turning a tragedy into a referendum on American race relations and setting up one of the most polarizing legal cases in recent history. But there is in fact far more to the story, as a recent Reuters’ investigation illuminates.

Reuters‘ report provides a complexity to the story that has been so sorely missing until now. Among other things, it calls into question the notion that white racism was the motivating factor in Martin’s shooting. That narrative was never entirely convincing, and not just because the mixed-race Zimmerman never fit into the media’s neat white-gunman-black-victim allegory. The New York Times‘ designation of Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic” was only the most strained attempt to impose a racial framework on the shooting.

Reuters‘ report muddles the racial element even further. It points out that Zimmerman was not only half-Hispanic but he also had black roots, tracing back to his Afro-Peruvian great grandfather on his mother’s side. So far from harboring anti-black racial resentments, he appears to have sought out the company of black friends and colleagues. In 2004, for instance, Zimmerman, an insurance agent, teamed up with a black friend to start up an insurance office.

Even more significant, perhaps, Reuters’ report makes clear that much of the media has simply failed to present the context in which the shooting took place. Yet that context is critical to understanding, if not justifying, why the shooting happened as it did. One would never suspect if from most media accounts, but Zimmerman had good reason to be suspicious of an unknown young black man walking through his neighborhood – and racism had nothing to do with it.

Pages: 1 2 3

  • crackerjack

    This article makes no sense and in effect , confirms the racist case against Zimmerman.

    As the article correctly points out – The sole reason for Zimmerman's suspicion and pursuit of Martin was the colour of Martin's skin.

    Zimmerman selected Martin on a racist stereotype profile. Had Martin been white, he would obviously still be among us today.

    If this is the quality of defense Zimmerman can hope for, he may well spend the majority of his life in prison.

    • ezra

      I guess, if he knew 70 year old white grandmas were breaking into home in his neighbor hood and he stop one that would make him a racist.

      • crackerjack

        Yes it would, because the mindset is the same – stereotyping all 70 year old white grandmas for the deeds of a few 70 year old white grandmas.

        But then again – Had Zimmerman stereotyped and shot a 70 year old white grandma, we would not be having this whole discussion because Zimmerman would have long been in jail, where he belongs, serving time for murder and this whole case would never have attained national and international attention.

        • davarino

          So you know all the facts of the case and would already have judged him and sentenced him. Where do you buy those crystal balls, I gots to get me one.

          • crackerjack

            The case is crystal clear. Zimmerman had no legal authority whatsoever to persue, harass and restrain a citizen going about his daily business. Florida's "stand your ground" legislation, on the other hand, gave Martin the legal right to resist Zimmerman by any means necessary, which includes smashing Zimmermans head on the sidewalk.

            The law is on Martins side. If you don't like it, change the law.

          • pagegl

            If Zimmerman did NOT pursue Martin and Martin did approach and then attack Zimmerman, Martin had no grounds to defend himself and Zimmerman did. If you believe the MSM media version of the events, which is not supported by physical evidence and some of which has been shown to be faked, then you are correct. However, since the physical evidence seems to support Zimmerman's version of the story, and given that he was there, the MSM was not, he had no agenda, and the MSM does, I would suggest you're wrong.

          • dalek

            There is one problem with your theory. The nieghborhood that Zimmermin lived in asked him to be the neighborhood watch guy. That alone gives him the right to observe, follow and contact law enforcement on who he is seeing, what they are doing and in my opinion, even the right to go into someones front/back yard to do so. If he did any less, they need a new neighborhood watch guy.

            Yea, Zimmerman may not have been paid or anything but he was asked to do it. This situation may not have been what they expected but I bet Zimmerman didn't either. I have also wondered, what would have happened if Zimmerman was not armed? Would Martin have killed Zimmerman? Would we have ever heard about it if he did?

            Ask yourself this. If you hire a someone to guard your home and property because there has been a rash of burglaries in the area, would you want him to watch and follow someone that is messing around your house? Zimmerrman was asked to watch over the whole neighborhood. He was doing what was asked of him in my opinion.

            I don't know about where you live but out here in the country where I am, I go walking around late at night. If I see someone messing around a house that doesn't belong, I'm calling 911 but I'm also going to follow and get all the info I can get about them. Description of the person, tag number and anything else I can see or hear. If I happen to be armed and that person approaches me and tries to jump on me, well, he's in the wrong neighborhood. I'm white and I could care less what color he is. The other thing is, my neighbors know I go out late at night walking. I have health issues and can't sleep. I know for a fact that they would think badly of me if I saw someone messing around and did anything less than what I wrote above. If the situation was reversed, I would feel the same about them. If I came home and everything was gone and one of my neighbors saw a truck pulled up to my porch and did nothing, I'd be plenty mad.

            I hope you don't have your home broke into. Then again, you may just sit there and let them take everything you worked for. If so, it's your stuff. I just hope they don't decide to beat you up before they leave.

          • eyemale

            Zimmerman wasn't asked , he volunteered. observe and call police is what neighborhood watch programs are told , That why the 911"O" say we don't need you to do that" to many americans say " I have a right to do this and that and blah blah blah" guess what? a lot of what people think they have a RIGHT to is assumption. and really don't know crap about the law . It sad when your house is ripped off , but that is life in America, and you can't just take the law in your own hands . the good guys have to act like the good guys , that why it sucks , if you act like those who are ripping you off you are no longer the good guys . but I do believe what goes around comes around . these jerks will get their sooner or later .

          • dalek

            It doesn't matter if he volunteered or not. Fact is, he was the neighborhood watch guy. From what I have heard in reports and from the eye witnesses, he was WATCHing Martin. Even on the 911 calls, he was not even trying to approach Martin or trying to make any contact with him. He was telling 911 where Martin was and what he was doing and trying to describe him as best as he could. When 911 told him not to, he went back toward his vehicle. That is from a witness. I also read that the location of the beating and Martins body was not far from Zimmermans vehicle. Eye witnesses report seeing Martin on top of Zimmerman beating on Zimmerman. Zimmerman has injuries to the back of his head and injuries to his nose. That is on the police videos. There is also a witness that heard Martin ask Zimmerman if he 'had a problem'. Zimmerman said 'no' and Martin said 'he does now.' That last witness needs a little more looking into tho. Even I am not so sure on that one. Someone needs to confirm the person was there and such.

            As to knowing the law, I have served on a jury. It was a Capitol Murder trial. I am also able to do research. I also know how to look at things from the perspective of a jury. What I do know so far based on eye witnesses and other confirmed info is this: Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch guy, volunteered or inducted doesn't matter. Martin was in a gated community and Zimmerman didn't recognise him as someone who should be there and he was acting odd. Zimmerman has injuries and witnesses saw Martin inflicting the injuries. Unless there is some serious evidence that shows Zimmerman provoked the fight, Zimmerman was defending himself.

            Now some people might want to say Zimmerman is guilty until proven innocent but that is not how things works. Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty. Right now, I don't see anything that proves he was not defending himself. If Zimmerman takes the stand and says he was defending himself and the evidence fits, he walks.

            As to taking the law into their own hands, the law gives a person the right to defend themselves. That's their right to do so. First thing, a person has to have a right to be somewhere. Zimmerman, as the neighborhood watch guy, had the right to be there. What was Martin doing there? That is a question I have not heard a answer to yet. The only thing close is that he had skittkles and a coke or something. Other than that, Martin appears to have had no business being there.

          • eyemale

            you can find a scene map on the web (I am not doing it for you ), you will see that GZ truck is parked on the street and the shooting took place in another court yard just a few houses down from where the teen was staying, there are no witness who saw GZ going back to his truck. it is zimmerman story is he was going back to his truck. and your right zimmerman did have injuries , and so did the teen ( a big hole in the chest)_ but still doesn't tell us who started it , and who was under attack.

        • Galveston

          according to your 'logic' the authorities should not have been looking at Italians when pursuing the mafia because that would have been profiling and sooooooo insensitive

          • eyemale

            what does Italians look like? . I am one . and very few people guess it. what does people of the Sicilian Mafia look like? you have any idea how many jews are confused as italians? and vise versa?__the big differenece the mafia already tell you the members , rather be Italian,Sicilian or black mafia. the only one who can't hide their race of the three are blacks. so is every black person a part of a black mafia. does it seem reasonable to profile every black person as part of the black mafia. wouldn't that be the same as all whites are connected to the KKK?__why are people making a case for profiling by race is ok. when they know darn well they wouldn't like it if their skin color was always connected to low lifes and crime.

        • EthanP

          Would a 70 year old white ( black/hispanic/oriental) grandmother have been pounding GZ's head into the ground? Not a "black" thing, but certainly a 17 YO's thing.

          • crackerjack

            If a 70 year old white grandmother pounded GZ head into the groud, she would be well within her "stand your ground" rights against a stranger who was following and threatening her. Check out Florida law.

        • kbp

          If you'll review the call to the police dispatcher you'll find that Zimmerman did not indicaate when he placed that call he was certain TM was black.

          The dispatcher then asks, “O.K., and this guy — is he white, black or Hispanic?”

          Mr. Zimmerman pauses and replies, “He looks black.”

        • coyote3

          There is no law prohibiting stereotyping, per se, or profiling per se. That is a big fallacy that has been created.

        • David

          Folks, don't argue with crackerjack or eyemale. They will make up facts to suit their cases. So when you prove them wrong, they will make up new "facts". For example, eyemale says that Zimmerman volunteered for the neighborhood watch. If he did "volunteer", it was because the neighborhood asked for volunteers and he stepped forward.
          So far as I know, the videotape from the store where Martin allegedly purchased the Skittles and iced tea has never been produced or subpoenaed. Is there a videotape? If yes, does it show Martin making this purchase? If yes, why hasn't it been produced? Does it show Martin shoplifting the 2 items [I am not accusing, just asking]?

          • eyemale

            LOL ok lets say TM just robbed a bank and was on his way back to the townhouse where he was staying , what would that have to do with GZ. he couldn't possiblity of known that. and how do volunteers become volunteers? because someone asks "is there any volunteers" and someone steps forward. or someone requests the postion or duty. __if there is anyone making up facts it is the GZ supporters. you are asking for proof that TM was at the store , ok let say he wasn't , my next question would be so what? maybe TM was coimg home after Black panthers meeting. again so what and what would that do with the GZ case? where ever TM was coimg back from isn't the issue , the issue is what happen at the point where GZ saw TM.

    • Coach

      It doesn't make sense to you. To every thinking person, this article is spot on. You, however, have an illness that doesn't allow you to think clearly. It is called liberalism, and, yes, to quote Michael Savage's book title, it is a mental illness.

    • Ageofreason

      Hey crack, if a rabbit eats my garden, I don't go moose hunting.

      • penny lane

        A good hunter doesn't get his nut cracked into the pavement by his prey.

        • coyote3

          Excuse me, the nut cracking was traveling about 1,200 fps, when it hit Martin.

          • dalek

            If it was any slower, I'd call that a misfire and shoot again. ;-)

          • coyote3

            Still, way under powered, but then, again, it was a handgun.

    • Western Canadian

      The article does NOT make the case of any such thing. Like most hard leftists, you are in need of remedial reading courses. Logic courses, will forever be beyond you, as would be independant thinking.

    • eyemale

      I am with you crackerjack, all areas have crime , few years ago in my apt building there was a bad case of stolen car stereos , one day I was walking out to the car ports and saw a slow moving car and a white kid walking slowly coming out the car port 2 spots back and got in the in car that was driveing slowly ,looking like he was hiding something , I saw it was a slim Jim . so I reported it , 4 nights later the police arrested 3 Mexicans for breaking to a car. some areas just attract crime , there is no profile what a thief look likes, wears , race ,age or even sex . to even suggest look out for blacks we believe that who is ripping us off ( based on some reports) . it got to be the most stupid crime prevention method . TM was reported in an open area . not coming out of a place/area that would of been strange for him to be.

    • Bob Silo

      I agree. Black men don't commit crimes and they certainly would NEVER hurt anyone.

      • eyemale

        wrong, all men( and women) of every race commits crimes . the only possible profiling that can been done is thru race population and the likeyhood thru statistics which isn't a 100% correct.

    • Nick Shaw

      Down with the race pimps and hustlers are you, Helen?

  • http://www.GodsSabbathRest.us Gary McAleer

    Good article to fill in the blanks of the cause and effect of what led to the incident. A belligerent spirit is common among those whose passions overrule the calm of reason. While Zimmerman definitely had his adrenaline pumping, it is clear that Trayvon escalated the altercation. His life's character contributed to his own demise, as his crude Internet postings show, which removes any "returning home from grandma's house with milk for mom" description of his temperament. If that young man took Zimmerman's approach in stride he'd still be alive and he could've left the scene without any conflict, just as Solomon admonished, "A soft answer turneth away wrath." But that's not how people think these days. The desire to hate is the norm. And to be full of hatred is to be full of murder. One is always a steppingstone to the other.

    • penny lane

      "A soft answer turneth away wrath."

      Those who passed Florida's "stand your ground" law, obviously did not trust Solomon's wisdom? LOL

      • oldtimer

        Jesus overturned the moneychangers tables and chase them out of the temple with the equivilant of a whip.

        • pennylane

          Sounds like Jesus would be an "occupy wall street" advocate today.

          • oldtimer

            Your ignorance doen't deserve a reply.

          • pennylane

            Learn your Bible oldtimer and stop being a hypocrite Christian. The cleansing of the money changers is the only, single mention in the Gospel of Jesus being aggressive. You exploit the episode to portray a Christ who would contradict his central teaching – Love Thy Enemy- by condoning the killing of an inocent kid. I guess your teaparty Jesus rejects feeding and healing the poor but supports the electrical execution of the wrongdoers.

          • JoJoJams

            you're correct in that he shouldn't have used the moneychangers analogy, but you're completely off-base on the "Love your enemy" and then extrapolating to your last sentence. Yes, we should "love" our enemies and pray for them, but that doesn't mean you sit back while they are raping your wife or child, or robbing you blind, or ANY injustice! And you're a fool if you think that's what the "love your enemy" (or "turn the other cheek") is about. As to your "Tea Party Jesus" comment, you infer somehow that the tea party is against feeding and healing the poor. Yet the facts completely negate your argument. Conservative donate more time and money to charities by a large margin. They believe in helping the poor more directly, on an individual basis. Whereas those of your apparent ilk believe in it being the governments role to tax those that have in order to give to those that don't.

          • JoJoJams

            (contd)
            I don't recall anything in the biblical Jesus as demanding of the Roman or Jewish leaders to take care of the poor. He went out and did it himself. It appears that it's the conservatives who are more closely aligned with how Jesus treated the "poor". It's YOU, pennylane, that needs to read scripture with a more open mind, without the filter of your own bigotries and selfishness, demanding the government rob Peter to pay for Paul.

          • johnnywoods

            JESUS` "central teaching" was "Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand".

          • intrcptr2

            Actually, yes, the NT does indicate that government has a legitimate capital power over criminals. It does not indicate that Christians are to be a part of that governmental apparatus.

            But I do not recall that Trayvon lived in poverty, so that point is pretty pointless. And who says he was innocent? Of what was he innocent? Why are you depicting him as Zimmerman's enemy? And what does the Tea Party have to do with any of this; I mean, really?

            And do remember, when he returns, he is not going to be loving his enemies at all. Please stop yourself quoting the Bible.

          • intrcptr2

            No, he would not. OWS says nothing about false religion, yet Jesus said nothing about economics other than pay your taxes (To the Romans who have occupied Israel).

            And our modern conceptions of contract law and private property stem from biblical ideas; so no, Jesus would not be breaking down doors on Wall Street demanding free college. Or smoking weed. Or cussing out cops. etc, etc

          • Western Canadian

            Your dishonesty deserves only contempt. You do not know scripture (and lie abou it), and do not know what went on when the young male was killed, so quit lying about that while you are at it.

      • intrcptr2

        Or maybe those legislators recognize that they do not live in a theocracy (A 3000 year-old one at that).

        Perhaps Tray's parents forgot Solomon's thinking on raising their son; "Spare the rod…" Had they applied that one, the boy would likely not have been concerned about a man following him, or acted the thug on-line.

        Come to think of it, why is Trayvon worried about a man following him (Account taken from a single source, his girlfriend) when he is walking around after dark in a strange neighborhood? It is a gated community and Trayvon didn't live there. And since when have you noticed such an observant teenager?

        His trip to the store for juice and Skittles is a cover; he was casing out the 'hood.

  • oldtimer

    Martin was an unknown man, who happened to be black, which Zimmerman did not mention until asked by 911 operator, walking through Zimmerman's neighborhood.

    • eyemale

      the profiling part ( if any is proved) has to be made to the reason GZ called 911 that lead to the death of a black teen . the jury will hear testomony about who GZ was based on any conversation , witness, or anything GZ wrote on the net . that suggests he was a racist.. a teen is dead and GZ caused it . was the leading factor zimmermans called 911 , followed and ended up shooting TM based on him being a racist. that is one part of the charges .

      • coyote3

        No, that is not the way it works. GZ can be the "Grand Cyclops", and that doesn't prove he committed any crime. Profiling, is perfectly legal, in and of itself.

  • davarino

    If I'm a neighborhood watchman in a crime ridden city and I've had stuff stolen, my neighbors have had stuff stolen, and there were breakins, its code red. I'm in high alert mode and all residents are in high alert mode. You walk through my neighberhood, dont start nothing and there wont be nothin.

    In the beginning the media tried to paint Zimmerman as crazy because he was constantly calling 911, well now we know why, and he wasnt crazy, the neighborhood was under assault. It seems to me that all Zimmerman was doing was trying to protect himself and his neighbors and this kid comes through late at night and wants to start some $hit.

    • blackadder

      Martin should have had a gun with him and shot Zimmerman right between the eyes the moment he started following and harassing him. In Florida, be armed, shoot first and claim self defense. This is what we learn from this case.

      • pagegl

        And if that is how you interpret the Stand Your Ground law you are dumber than a box of rocks.

      • johnnywoods

        If Martin was "an innocent unarmed black teenager" who had just gone to the store for some Skittles he should have kept his mouth shut and kept walking. He would still be alive today.

        • eyemale

          so what you are saying is …..know your place and shut your face BOY. there nothing that suggests that TM was doing anything but walking home . the fact that GZ said he was just standing around looking at houses doesn't make it fact, far as you know TM stopped to read or send a text. when are you zimmerman supporters going to get it ? what GZ says doesn't have to be the truth . no one here knows GZ or TM so why beleive only GZ because he has a story . the 911 call started out explaining break ins. frame of mind suggests GZ saw this teen and thought he was guilty of the crimes .

      • coyote3

        If you interpret stand your ground, or any other self defense law, as you state, better get ready for some real fun, in a real prison, for a real long time.

        • dalek

          Not if I am on the jury. If I was on the jury, I'd be playing close attention to who belongs where. The person that belongs somewhere has the right to stand their ground. The person who doesn't belong, it sucks to be them. Better play nice.

          Good example. I served on jury about 10 or 11 years ago. It was a death penalty case. Afterwards, I was talking to the prosecutor. He asked me about a case they were thinking on but had not filed charges. A guy was in a house and the home owner shot him. The prosecutor asked me if I could find the home owner guilty of ANY charge since the crook was UNarmed. My response was something like this. You could count on a hung jury. If a person breaks into someones home, it sucks to be them. I'm not sure what the law is and it wouldn't really matter a whole heck of a lot. The person that owns the home was supposed to be there. The crook wasn't. It sucks when you get caught is all I can say. My advice to crooks, break into a liberals home. They don't generally have guns and are less likely to shot if they do. Otherwise, you put your thieving life into someone else's hands. They may chose to not want it too.

          Keep in mind, juries aren't lawyers. They are common folks for good reason. Laws that don't make sense, don't get guilty verdicts very often.

          • coyote3

            As far as having a right to be there goes, they were both, apparently, where they had a "right" to be. I don't quite know what you are saying, but I was replying to "blackadder". I actually don't disagree with you.

          • dalek

            They could have. It's why I want more info on what Martin was doing there. I don't have that part yet. I know why Zimmerman was there. That part is fine. He was neighborhood watch so he is supposed to be there. Martin, I have only heard a rumor that he was going to a store, then it was he was visiting friends, then it was some other reason. Heck, one report claimed he and friends was the ones breaking into the other homes. I don't know that and have not read anything official that even claims it. Possible. Possibly not.

            I'm waiting on the trial. I want to hear the testimony of the witnesses and to get a better look at the evidence. Some evidence has been shown but not all. I really want to know if it was a close range shot and if anyone actually saw who approached who. Basically, who was the agresser. I don't have a huge issue if Zimmerman tried to ask Martin what he was doing myself. If I saw a stranger messing around my neighbors home, I'd ask them what they are doing too. Asking a question is not generally a threat. It may be to a crook tho. That's my reason for wanting to know what Martin was doing there.

          • eyemale

            asking a question isn't a threat , but what if the person you ask knows he has a right to be there and doesn't want to answer your question , and says " whats it to you pal?" what then? do you follow him , do you pull out a gun and say " answer me now punk" LOL,, people and their opinions of what they think they have a right to , or what they think they are entitled to. then turn around and complain their privacy in being invaded when someone starts asking them questions . cracks me up when people say " but GZ was the NW captain " so the blank what. how does that give him any more authority than any one else? that just makes him the go to guy . "tell george your concerns or report a break in"

          • dalek

            If that person has the right to be there, I don't think they would say that. Did you not read what I wrote about my neighbor? I have actually DID these things to protect my neighborhood. What do you do for yours? Just sit in you home and watch the crooks walk off with things? Do you let people sell drugs in youor neighborhood and gripe about it but do NOTHING to help? You come off as that type of person. You want it right but not willing to put in any effort of your own.

            I'm beginning to think you just want to despute anything a person says regardless of the facts. Thing is, you don't know everything about what happened either. None of us do at this point. I'm basing my opinion on what I do know. That is all we have right now.

          • eyemale

            whole point was you have no idea how someone would respond to being questioned. a lot people today have an attitude. they just might tell you to mind you own business or don't worry about what they are doing. but that wouldn't mean they were up to no good .

            this is what I notice about the Zimmerman supporters , they think only one way and there is only one possible scenario for this situation. there minds are closed to other possibilities. zimmerman was in the right because he was the NW guy and TM was wrong because he was the 17 year old HOOD/THUG. sometimes in life things aren't what they seem. it not a perfect world where everything is black and white( no pun intended) like for example there are
            men out there pretending to be men of God just ripping people off for their cash. their followers see them as good men who wouldn't believe in a million years they were crooks.

            I don't believe all of GZ story because it is too faultless…

            "beware of wolves in sheep's clothing"

          • dalek

            Thing is, I'm seeing it from both sides. You on the other hand have made up your mind, from the first day you claimed, that Zimmerman was wrong. You won't change your mind no matter what. I'm still open to new info and evidence. You however are not.

            Who is closed minded again? Look in the mirror.

          • eyemale

            because the 911 call proves ( at least to me) GZ was wrong. he got out of his truck and followed what he beleived to be a possible armed suspect. " something in TM hand.. waist band.." that what GZ said . which I believe GZ was only trying to convince 911 there was a dangerous armed suspect…. so if that part is true and GZ was just "making stuff up about the teens behavior" to draw more attention from police . then it possible he also lying about being attacked or should say lying about TM attacking him 1st.

          • dalek

            Oh, you admit, Martin was acting in a threatening way and Zimmerman reported it on the 911 tape. Wow !! I'm shocked. Since you realize that, maybe Zimmerman had reason to really watch him and help police catch him. After all, Zimmerman thought he was armed and was acting in a suspicious way.

            If Zimmerman attacked Martin first, why does Zimmerman have the injuries on the back of his head and the bloody nose? The reports I read said that Martin only had the gunshot wounds. No cuts, scratches or anything else. If Zimmerman attacked Martin, where is the proof? Me, if I have a gun and I think someone else with a gun, you admitted that Zimmerman thought he had one, then I wouldn't have let Martin get close enough to me to hit me and knock me to the ground. I always remember the 21 foot rule. Look it up. Cops are taught that too. It may vary on the situation but it is a good guide.

            I do have to admit that sometimes you have to give the police a GOOD reason to move their butts. It reminds me of a joke. Goes something like this:

            Guy calls 911 and tells them 'someone is breaking into the house next door'. 911 says 'they will get someone out but it will be a bit since they are busy'. Guy hangs up.

            Guys calls back and tells them 'not to rush because he shot them all'. VERY soon after multiple officers arrive and several cars. They catch the crooks while trying to leave the house.

            The cops says to the guy that called, 'I thought you said you shot them all'? The guy says, 'I thought you was busy and was going to take a while'.

            Moral of the story, squeaky wheel gets the grease. 2nd moral, be able to defend yourself. You can't depend on others to do it for you.

          • eyemale

            "break into a liberals home. They don't generally have guns" LOL

            liberals are free thinkers that know there is more than one way to skin a cat. I don't own a gun. but have motion lights out side, an alarm in side , cams to record when I am at home or not home. and best part my home INS gives me a discount for the added security. 2 attemps of a break in since I set this stuff up , both attempt the theif got nothing cam shows them running way after alarm went off . and also show the 2nd attempt was two teens who lived on the block. an arrest was made . I lost nothing and didn't have to clean blood off the new carpet.

          • dalek

            The first time some junkie needing a fix breaks into your home, that alarm may not do you a bit of good. You will be sitting there, unarmed, while the crook steals your stuff and could even kill you. Oh, don't worry, it's on video. It won't bring you back to life but oh well.

          • eyemale

            there was a study done that said conservatives are conservatives because of a part of the brain that senses fear more intense than liberals, That why conservatives support gun laws and trillions being spent on defense. because of a constant fear of being attacked or taking over by an enemy.

            another study on gun owners and non gun owner show 25% of gun owners used their gun in self defense. where as only 9% of non gun owners said they was in situation where they felt they might of needed a gun.

            65% of home invasions that involved robbery was homes where there a was gun in the house .27% of those robbery the gun was stolen. and most likely sold on the black market . AKA hands of criminals.

            I have thought long and hard about owning gun, and the idea just didn't appeal to me . I have lived over 60 years in one the most dangerous cites in the USA. and feel I have made a wise choice. whatever happens …happens ….got to go sometime …

          • dalek

            There are studies about liberals too. You should check them out.

            OK, .27% of robberies has a gun stolen. That's pretty good. That's way less than 1%. I would have thought it was more than that.

            You choice is your choice. My choice is to have a say in when I go and how. One way I won't go is to have a thief break into my home, kill me and me totally helpless while they do it and the Sheriff is about 15 minutes away. That's if I even get to call them at all. You made your choice, fine. I'm standing with the Constitution and my right to defend myself, both legal and God given rights. Giving up those rights is YOUR choice. Don't think I'm going to change my choice because you decided to put your life in the hands of some thief.

          • eyemale

            I don't expect you to change , change isn't a part of a conservative nature. I know you have a right to own a gun. never said I wanted it to be any other way. I don't fill my head with unpleasant thoughts of bad people out to get me . I just live and let live .

          • dalek

            Until the facts or the laws change, not likely. If you claim not to 'fill your head with thoughts of bad people out to get you', then Martin should have thought the same way. Just ignore Zimmerman and walk to the house. None of this would have happened then.

          • eyemale

            LOL yeah the teen should of been the mature one , while the gun packing adult can act any way he wants. and follow and intimidate a minor.

          • dalek

            He didn't know he was a minor or even a teen. He thought he was in his mid tweenties. Given the size of Martin, I would have likely thought the same thing.

          • eyemale

            wrong go to the 911 tape GZ said "late teens" and later on said " I don't know where the "KID" is

    • eyemale

      TM was seen by GZ at around or after 7:00pm , GZ call to 911 was 7:09pm there goes your late at night theroy

      GZ was on the way to the store ( driving and it was raining) when he saw TM. how much time you think he spent checking the teen out before he thought I better call this in . couldn't be long and he couldn't see much in the rain driving by, except a hoodie. and maybe that TM was black

  • Al Gagne

    Zimmerman should be found not guilty and the Black KKK Panthers who have viciously pulled the two Virginia new journalists out of their vehicle and beat them to nearly death because they were driving while white should be shot on site. But that won't happen. Because the Black KKK Pathers are protected racist group. Just like the Nazi Brown Shirts in 1932. Also, Christians ad Jews are under attack Just like Nazi Germany. Wake up America. We are heading toward Socialism just like Nazi Germany. Obama is dividing this country and if he is re-elicted Christians and Jews had better beware.

    • eyemale

      LOL now it Obama fault? why should Christians beware? Obama stated he is a Christian. if anyone should beware it people from Christians , because they decided a long time ago it the only belief allowed and or counts .

      I have no Issue with God , it his fan club that concerns me .

    • Bob Silo

      It was the white guy's fault. The white journalist provoked the black mob when he got out of his car to see who threw a rock at the car.

  • StephenD

    Of course, making "Profiling" a crime is what this is about. Zimmerman is not a cop. He profiled based upon statistical history and experience…so what?!? He did exactly what you or I would do…and what Jesse Jackson would do! Jesse said: "There is nothing more painful for me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start to think about robbery and then look around and see it’s somebody white and feel relieved.” Sounds like “Profiling” to me!! Is Jesse RACIST?!? I'd say Jesse is Practical in this situation based on experience and statistical facts…just like Zimmerman…just like the rest of us.

    • Bill

      Just as

  • eyemale

    Part 1 Not really sure GZ knew who was doing the break in's ( skin color or age) can't say for sure GZ was a racist, but something about TM intimidated him , other wise GZ would of just drove up to him and ask " you live around here" or " are you lost" ( as two examples )…._in the 911 call the 1st thing GZ mention was the break in's, then how strange TM was acting. ( looking around at the houses) then added something is wrong with him , commented about drugs, then told 911 the strange "late teen" was checking him out, something in his hand , mention his waistband ( where weapons are kept)

    • eyemale

      part 2

      the whole 911 call GZ was trying to convince the 911 operator , there a possible dangerous armed , maybe high on drugs strange teen acting funny and suspicious in his gated neighborhood ( where there been a lot of break in's) GZ also says "and it raining" which makes it even more strange that some unknown person would be out looking around at houses in the rain. either these facts were truth about how TM was acting or GZ was exaggerating maybe for a faster response time from police. I think GZ was convinced this is the guy responsible for the break in's or was convince he was up to no good . which goes to frame of mind of GZ._ ….concerned, scared, panic, pumped up , and maybe even vengeance in form of capture._ _

    • Nick Shaw

      "Looking around at houses" is called "casing" in most books. Particularly on a rainy night. particularly when the person being watched heads around to the back door of a residence, Helen.
      One of these days you will be mugged.
      Get back to us with your thoughts on the ordeal. If you live through it.
      Until then, keep your whining to yourself.
      There are no racists here and Zimmerman was / is not a racist either. He rightly followed a guy he thought to be acting suspiciously. That guy attacked him and wound up dead because he was a jerk thug. End of story.
      Or, at least, according to police at the scene (two of whom happened to be called out by Zimmerman for their participation in the beating death of a YOUNG, BLACK man!!) that should have been the end of the story but, the race hustlers and Zero supporters need the distraction so, the story continues without merit..

      • eyemale

        wow does zimmerman have a brother ? are you him? I go out out all the time on a rainy night , zimmerman was on his way out to the store on the same rainy night. the teen was visiting he didn't live there , he could of been looking around to get his bearings of where he was being unfamiliar with the area.

        • Nick Shaw

          You really believe Martin was too stupid to retrace his route? Getting his bearings? What makes you think it was his first visit to his father's house?
          C'mon man! Stop making excuses!

          • eyemale

            so the candy and ice tea was no proof he just went to the store? why couldn't TM just be talking on his cell ( bluetooth) and stop walking for a second? or was texting. reading and writing. what do you know about GZ that makes you so sure he so honest and sane? . his two 1st lawyers dumped him because he wouldn't listen to them and did things his own way. GZ was a over zealous losse cannon wanna -be cop…Aka Bellevue bait as we say in my home town. ( my opinion)

  • eyemale

    part 3
    Now lets look at TM , coming back from the store , did have a reason to be there ,sees GZ checking him out , following him , acting excitable or maybe a little odd ,TM has to be thinking what is this guys deal. TM gets almost home and notices GZ is walking in the path thru where he lives/staying . and walks up to GZ and asks "are you following me?"what happens from there is anyones guess why a fight broke out. Did GZ have his hand on his gun? was the gun visible? did GZ make a threaten gesture. or did TM ( who knew he did nothing wrong) just walk up to GZ and punch him in nose and jump on him beating his head against the ground because he was just a violent punk who just likes doing things like that?yeah I am sure that it .LOL think people!!!!!

    • coyote3

      Well, you can believe what you want to believe, but a jury won't consider any of this, unless there is a foundation for it, and all you have done is speculate and assume facts which are not, and won't be in evidence.

      • eyemale

        that the beauty of a trail , the way questions are asked and answered can open a new can or worms .

    • IrishgalfromDE

      As a cracker, white not whole wheat, I tend to believe that the situation was escalated by both parties due to the fact that neighborhood had been terrorized and that someone was following a person who was innocent and didn't know why he was being followed. Both situations warrant suspicion.
      Unfortunately, I too become suspicious of anyone wearing a hoodie when the weather doesn't truly warrant it. I have lived in Florida and would like to know what the temperature was that evening. I cannot imagine it warranted a hoodie. Babies wear hoodies, but so do criminals and persons trying to hide their faces and identity. I am not saying that I believe Trayvon was guilty of anything, but I don't think George was racist or out to murder someone either. The whole situation has a very sad ending for Trayvon and likely for George. Why have we reached this point in America? That is one of the saddest points that likely will not go away. How many of you are willing to reach across the isle to someone of a different culture or skin color? It goes both ways, but it takes just one to make the first move.

      • eyemale

        don't know the temp, but it was night and raining , Hoodie could been because of the rain or the only thing he had to wear ( sweater wise) because he was only visiting didn't live there, I am in my 60's and wear a hoodie all the time , I have a blue one , red one , and a black one , and pull it over my head when it rains .. all of America has crime , many are committed by blacks as well as Asians , Latino , whites and etc . accusing someone with out valid proof is wrong ( and color of skin and what clothes are wore isn't valid proof ) GZ had this teen pegged as a criminal from 1st look . he was too scared ( he claims) to just drive up to him to even ask " whats up , hello , or even just ask he lived around there " but wasn't too scared to follow him out side his truck… going around buildings and blinds spots .?

      • LugNut

        The other thing missing in all this is the fact the fact that GZ was not wearing anything that identified him as being part of the local security team. No hat, vest, badge, or even light and decal on his vehicle identifying him as a security guard. TM might not have assaulted GZ if he knew he was local security.

        • eyemale

          GZ said he was scared of the teen to point he rolled up his windows. but not to scared to follow him out side the truck . it just doesn't make sense to me , scared , not scared which is it ?

          • Nick Shaw

            Oh, brother you are an idiot!
            The thug went behind a building. To the back of the building where Zimmerman's truck couldn't go.
            He was a neighborhood watchman.
            Do you think maybe he overcame his fear, with his dedication to protecting his neighbors?
            Maybe just to peek around the corner of the building to see where this thug (who happened to be casing houses) was going?
            I pity the person who has to depend on you for any assistance in a possibly dangerous situation, Helen.

          • eyemale

            no need for name calling, look at the townhouse area map , it shows the path TM took and where he was shot , he stay in a normal route to where he was visiting.

          • Nick Shaw

            Yes, I saw the map. If Martin had stayed on the route to his home he would have been there within a minute or two but, HE DECIDED TO GO BEHIND A BUILDING!
            Zimmerman already thought he was acting suspicious. He probably thought he was casing houses.
            Is it really that difficult to figure out?

          • eyemale

            really and what building did TM go behind?

          • Nick Shaw

            I note you think it hard to knock a man down with one punch. I can't find the exact comment so, I'll put this here. http://www.wtsp.com/news/topstories/article/25524
            One punch and the guy was down. Just like Zimmerman I'm guessing.

          • eyemale

            not like zimmerman, 1. there is no video only GZ story. and 2 GZ and Tm had words , witness said they heard loud voices of two man arguing. so that rules out a sneak attack like GZ claimed . it is very possible to knock someone down if you come out of no where , but more times than not it a reaction to fall with the punch and not a knock out punch. if you can find the ST Patrick day beating that what a knock out punch looks like , that guy didn't get up , but then again look at the size of the man that hit him.

  • EthanP

    The Martin/Zimmerman affair is a carefully planned leftist/black radical move. It's revitalized the moribund black radicals (Jackson, Sharpton et al) with new relevancy. It has also revitalized the equally moribund anti gun movement. Look at the attacks on stand your ground laws. The shrill demands to disarm all community whatches. (Even if you are legally CCW). I'm not taking sides in this tragedy. And it is a tragedy. Both men did stupid things. And Martin was a 17 year old young man. Thats a definition of stupid. All you men, remember the dumb things you did at 17? Unfortunately, the left, and the black radicals beside them now want their pound of flesh.

    • mlcblog

      You are saying they arranged to have that young man killed in order to produce all this. You have left reality. Get a grip. It was a horrible unfortunate turn of events. We have enough trouble sorting it out without this kind of thinking.

      • Nick Shaw

        Perhaps it's you that should get a grip, Mlc.
        Ethan was referring to the fall out from the incident, not the actual incident.
        The only place I disagree with Ethan is in that both men did stupid things.
        Personally, I think Zimmerman acted in exactly the way anyone would in an effort to protect his community from roving criminals.
        He followed a suspicious character to the back of a building. To elude Zimmerman or to break into the building doesn't matter. If Martin did break into the building, Zimmerman would have known exactly where he was when the police eventually arrived. He would have then been a neighborhood hero.
        In fact, the punk circled the building and met Zimmerman on his way back to his truck and sucker punched him. Too freaking bad for Martin. The punk figured he could take out the little white guy. He brought fists to a gunfight.

        • mlcblog

          NIck, I am so with you! apparently I misread, or have you? the contribution by Ethan.

          Looking at it again, you are right. I was wrong.

          Ethan is talking about the media/leftist onslaught AFTER the incident. I wrongly construed him to be saying that community had planned the entire incident!! which would indeed be really crazy.

          Thank you.

        • eyemale

          LOL I love it , the back of what building? GZ truck was parked on the street, the shooting took place inside of a roll of town homes in the middle of a grass area ( court yard) the same roll of homes where TM was staying. TM may of saw this crazy guy was still out there and went out to ask if he was follow him or to ask why he following him. some words were exchanged and fight broke out . who started isn't known , but the whole sneak up or sucker punch story is B.S, GZ might of made his gun known to TM and TM felt his life was in danger, or GZ made a comment ( insulting ) and that why the fight broke out. NO BODY KNOWS. how both ended up on the ground or who or what caused it . but GZ has a history of resisting arrest , where one case was assaulting a cop. so much for your squeaky clean good guy. sounds like to me GZ was just as much of a punk as TM was .

  • eyemale

    why can't people just look at the facts , and forget about Al and Jackson , they are who they are, this is about Murder VS self defense. let the race baiters and the pro gun lobbyist fight it out among themselves . the Public now wants the truth about what happen that night , regardless who got it to this level. and I think there is a lot of unanswered questions that rates a trail.

  • tagalog

    "Don't judge me by my hair"?

    How about not judging people by their income? Or by their color? How about that?

  • oldtimer

    Case in point. You are mall security. In Fl., temps in the 80s. You receive a call that a store has been robbed. You look south and see a young girl running out of the south exit, in shorts and a teeshirt. You look north and see a person running out of the north exit, dressed in baggy jeans, wearing a hoodie concealing his face.
    You only have one choice, who would you persue?

    • eyemale

      neither….. mall security is there to only report as a witness to the crime not to take matters into their own hands like running after suspects . stopping a possible shoplifter as they walk out the store is a totally different situation , and they still have to be careful how they treat the person in that case. only the police can act as police , unless it a life or death situation.

      • oldtimer

        Mall police then, since some malls have substations in malls.

      • coyote3

        Not so, actually, if it is a felony, and all thefts are felonies, initially, in my state, citizens have just as much authority to apprehend and arrest as the police. There is no such thing as only the police can act as police. That is true for some minor infractions, and "investigations", but otherwise the only difference between ordinary citizens and police is that the police are paid to do it. I have spent an entire career in law enforcement, including as a prosecutor, and many, many felony arrests are made by citizens.

        • eyemale

          felonies are based on dollar amount ….or intent ( if planned) like for example if I had a cut in my jacket for the purpose to slip merchandise in then clearly I was planing to steal before I went into the store . 1000's of law suits happen every day because people "citizens" interfere and go beyond the scope of authority. you cause harm to someone in a chase or whatever you better be prepared for a law suit. police have training in law enforcement. and even they sometimes end up in court for excessive force.

          and in some states vigilante type behavior isn't welcome at all. not a good ideal guy to tell people they have pretty much the same authority as police . GZ is in the position he is now just because of his over zealous wanna be cop behavior

          • coyote3

            Now, you are just lying, in our state citizens are immune from prosecution, and civil penalties if it is actually a felony. And no, you are lying again, in our state all thefts "begin" as felonies, although they might not be prosecuted as such. GZ may be in the position he is in because of overzealous police. Why are you arguing with me about something I do for a living? Whether you like it or not except for investigations, and infractions, citizens do have the same power as police, where I live, welcome or not.

          • eyemale

            I am lying? or do you mean I might be misinformed about the laws of your state? I know what the laws are of where I live . I really doubt stealing a candy bar is on the books as a felony. citizens having the same power as police is a scary thought.

          • intrcptr2

            So you prefer to be policed ny the state?

            That is the truly terrifying part;
            Are you honestly that unaware of world history, that you think the state is better at protecting your rights than yourself, or trusted neighbors? The story of the 20th Century alone is the story of governments killing their own subjects with wild abandon. The US Constitution doesn't even recognize the concept of police, as we know of them, because there were none then.

            The problem, and it is perhaps the most serious problem we have today in America, is that over time more and more power/authority that once was recognized as legitimately in the hands of citizens has been arrogated by the state, which means the police. And our educational system has played a central role in justifying this. It is why so many people support ObamaCare, and why so many supported the PATRIOT Act when it was first passed.

          • eyemale

            these a holes always get away , Zimmerman wanted this guy , and for what? standing or walking in his neighborhood? If TM had a tv in his hands or was near a open windows or walking around peeking in cars , then ok . but GZ didn't want to talk to TM because something about him didn't seem right.? did GZ ever explain that . doesn't seem right , maybe on drugs . or maybe he is black? is it self defense or seem believable when a person runs after and follows a person they say maybe on drugs , doesn't right and admits they were scared of. " oh this guy seems scary , he is bigger than me , something wrong with him , he is doped up, oh well think I will chase after him"

          • coyote3

            In most states they do have the same power as police. Police are nothing special, they are just paid to do it, and I am talking as one who has spent a lifetime in law enforcement. Again, you can doubt all you want, but in most states thefts "begin" as felonies. They are listed as felonies by statute, but they may be charged and prosecuted as misdemeanors, so yes they are felonies to begin with.

          • eyemale

            The distinction between felony and misdemeanor theft also usually depends on the value of the item(s) stolen. If there is more than one item stolen, then the total value of all of the items stolen will be used in determining the classification of the theft crime. Many states classify the different levels of theft crimes depending on the value of the property involved in the crime.

          • coyote3

            Not in our state. All thefts start out as D felonies. They may be pled down, or prosecuted as misdemeanors, but the statute "defining" theft, defines all thefts as felonies. What you may be thinking of is "conversion" which is an entirely different crime. Conversion, in most cases is a misdemeanor, and the statute defines is as such.

      • Nick Shaw

        Really? That's your answer? Is there really any "male" in you, Helen?

        • eyemale

          that like the 3rd time you call me helen , who is helen? and yes that is my answer , security are told to only watch and report and avoid altercations , this is because of INS reasons. armed security on the other hand can choose to take action , they have to provide their own INS.

    • Nick Shaw

      I understand your hypothesis, Oldtimer (none that replied seem to!).
      You know who I would pursue, as would you!
      You don't even have to be a mall cop. If you witness a crime or hear about it as in your example, why not call the cops and follow in the hope of finding out where the suspicious character went or his license plate number?
      The responses to your question seem to point out we have become a nation of panty waisted liberals hoping that public safety is someone else's concern or the police arrive on time.
      They never do.

      • eyemale

        that is not reason , the reason a person shouldn't get to involve is , they could get hurt or killed , and sometimes a citizen involvement interferes with police leading to escape or being prosecuted or a citizen actions can cause harm to another citizen. ( example)by chasing a thief who decides to escape by hi-jacking a near by car.

  • rmh222

    The real problem here is this strange Florida law that allows the police to release a perpetrator if they believe he acted in self-defense. No arrest. No charges. No trial. I think this is way too much power for police to have. I think this has too much potential for abuse. I believe this is what upset Trayvon’ s Family. I think this would upset any family. I believe in the 2nd amendment and self-defense, but if somebody is dead their family needs a trial to put the case to rest. I live in Texas. In Texas we execute murders by lethal injection. If I kill somebody, no matter how much they needed it, I will be arrested and have to face a grand jury where I can plead self-defense. If my case is clear that will be the end of it. I accept this as the price of civilization.

    • pagegl

      I also live in Texas and if someone is on your property at night and approaches you in a fashion that suggests he is going to attack you there is a very good chance you will not be indicted if you shoot and kill that person. If that person had a weapon in his hand it is almost certain you will not be indicted.

      • eyemale

        but it is different if it is a public place and the person with the gun more in less picks the fight causing the other person to take a swing at them and then shooting them just because they losing the fight .

        • mlcblog

          how about if they are bigger than you and banging your head on the concrete till it bleeds?

          • eyemale

            bigger? you mean taller? bigger is debatable, , if you can't beat them , then don't "F" with them. how do you know TM wasn't concern about his safety from a strange man following him. all you know is the two some how came face to face. who started the fight is one mans story because the other one is dead.

        • intrcptr2

          A gated community is not a public place.

          And enough with the rabid speculation already.

          • eyemale

            yes but a gated community does have visitors and that what TM was . if GZ just took the time to talk to the teen he might of found that out , instead he freaked and allowed his paranoid fears get the best of him. called 911 and started following an innocent teen who was only guilty of walking home from the store .

          • intrcptr2

            Like I said, stop with the speculating; not one bit of what you've just reiterated is currently verifiable.

            If you are going to demand that others here don't have enough facts to judge George as innocent of murder, then how is it you have enough evidence to judge Trayvon as innocent of being up to no good?

            If Zimmerman was following him, and Martin was worried about this, heading home, then why did he turn and confront him? Or did Trayvon somehow think that Twin Lakes was a dangerous place, too? Doesn't make much sense confronting someone in a strange neighborhood…

          • eyemale

            because TM route was on the way back to the townhouse and the fact he did have candy and and Ice tea shows was just coming back from the store . to assume anything except he was just walking home is assuming too much. to ask why a dead teen just didn't do this or do that is once again assuming too much. if TM was still alive they could of asked him why he thoughgt he had to confront GZ. just like GZ had a chance to tell his story why he thought he had to shoot this teen .

          • intrcptr2

            And with all of that you've just proven my point about yoru won speculations on Zimmerman's guilt, and Martin's innocence; you, like so many others, are assuming the worst on Zimmerman's part, while simultaneously assuming the best on Martin's part; it is possible in these sorts of situations (All too common, really) for BOTH parties to be wrong.

            We do not know. The police on the scene decided that George's story held water, so they released him. After a few weeks of media clamouring, with no new evidence, a special prosecutor has decided that George is indeed likely the wild-eyed, racist vigiliante that certain types have called him.
            That is not how criminal justice is to work.

            Neither is all the promised violence, physical or metaphorical, being directed at Zimmerman. Why have those people publishing wanted posters not been dragged before a court?

          • eyemale

            I guess you could say I think he guilty , but mainly I am saying he not telling the truth about that night , simply because things just don't add up. to beleive his story you have to beleive TM some how just appeared and punch him in the face so hard he fell to ground . GZ was just following this teen , he mention to 911 after giving his address he wish he didn't because he didn't know where the "kid" was, as to say he might be close by. so minutes later he just walks clamly back to his truck with out any concern the teen might still be around and the teen sneaks up on punches him.

          • Nick Shaw

            You are an idiot, Helen.
            You seem to have done enough research but, not enough to realize Martin circled the building he went behind and decked Zimmerman on the way back to his truck. He was attacked on the sidewalk (Zimmerman's head was being bashed on that very sidewalk just short of his truck!)
            Obviously you have never been punched in the face. Most times, you do fall to the ground when you are punched in the face out of the blue. Real life is not the movies!
            You really should stop commenting on this story. You are making an ass of yourself, Helen.

          • eyemale

            guy I am in my 60's I grew up in the south Bronx, I have been in more fights than I choose to remember, I also have military training ( Nam) and I am telling you it take one hell of a punch to knock a MAN to the ground. that what I and friends use to call being "cold cock-ed" . TM didn't have the weight or the power in those skinny arms. a lot of light weight professional boxers can hardly do it with one punch.

    • coyote3

      Actually, it wasn't the police who released Zimmerman, it was the prosecuting attorney. I live in Tejas as well, and they don't "have" to refer it to a grand jury if they choose not to do so. Agreed, most of the time they do, but that is for their own protection. Actually, it is up to the state to prove that you did not act in self defense, not the other way around.

      • dalek

        Actually, if you plead self defense, the burden is on you. It's the same with insanity. Actually, they are usually handled the same way basically. Either is a active defense. If you are charged and the evidence shows you are innocent, you don't even have to say anything because the burden is on the state. Of course, I would say why I am innocent in the closing arguments tho, just in case the jury missed it. :-)

        If you plead self defense or insanity, you got to prove it. I have to also say, I think self defense is easier to prove than insanity. Remember, juries aren't lawyers and most are not shrinks either. Defendant showing up wearing only a diaper and sucking on a pacifier may help tho, especially if the Judge allows it. LOL A Judge would only fear a insane person since they have armed guards and all. o_O

        I'm in Mississippi so maybe Texas is that different. I do know that I saw on the news one morning where a spouse walked into a motel and blew the two cheaters away. The shooter was "detained" for a few minutes then released. As far as I heard on the news, he/she was never even finger printed. I can't recall if it was the hubby or the wife that did the shooting. Only in Texas. God bless 'em. I just love 'em.

        • intrcptr2

          An insanity plea has nothing to do with being insane, so on that point you've missed it. If you mean having a psych eval to see if the defendant is mentally competent to stand trial, there too, you're off; it is court appointed psychologists who do that, not defense teams.

          Self- defense is an argument. But it still relies on the evidence; separating the two is not how it works. There is no courtroom in America where the judge instructs the jury differently based upon what sort of defense strategy MAY be used; the bruden of proof of legal/moral culpability is always on the state, not the individual defendant. This is, or at least once was, basic English/American Common Law.

          • dalek

            Maybe this will help:
            http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/8.01.00.html

            "§ 8.01. INSANITY. (a) It is an affirmative defense to
            prosecution that, at the time of the conduct charged, the actor, as
            a result of severe mental disease or defect, did not know that his
            conduct was wrong."

            As it says, insanity is a "affirmative defense" which means you have to prove it. That is Texas law and I suspect it is the same in most states. Just because you claim you are a couple cans short doesn't mean they have to believe you. SORT of the same for self defense. You have to prove you were defending yourself. You basically don't dispute you killed someone, you say you have a good legal reason for killing someone.

            Maybe read this site for a Texas lawyer:
            http://www.attorneys.com/criminal-defense/texas/a

            "The other type of defense, and the one most choose to rely on in assault cases, is known as an affirmative defense in Texas. This means that you do admit to committing the actions alleged by the prosecution. However, you present evidence to back up a claim that your actions were legally justified."

            Someone breaks into my home and I shoot them. I plead self defense. If I plead self defense, I am saying I killed the person but I had good legal reason to do so. I prove that and I walk. I don't prove that, I'm going to jail.

            I go to McDs and kill someone while they are eating a Big Mac. I plead self defense. Unless that Big Mac is loaded or some other threat, I'm going to have a hard time proving this one. I'm most likely going to be in jail for a while. Please write, I may get lonesome. lol

            Do you see now that in both self defense and insanity, the burden of proof is on you not the state?

          • intrcptr2

            Ok, I see what you're getting at here. I have a few responses, though.

            1. As I already mentioned, criminal insanity is not the same as mental insanity. Notice in the Breivik case, the court needed to determine if he was capable of going trial in the first place. http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/insane/insa… I think it pretty clear he sees what he did as morally justifiable, and thus legally defensible (There is of course the philosphical issue of just how sane it is to kill a person in the first place).

            What I get out of reading up on this is that the concept wavers, and TX code seems to define it rather broadly. What about a person who has no mental defects who still does not see the moral issue in a certain crime? As a personal example, I got a ticket for parking the wrong way once, but I still do not see why it is a crime; can I plead criminal insanity?

            2. Self-defense is that grey area of the law. Our legal code is meant to be serving a higher law, and that one presumes that a man has a moral right to defend himself. There is a confusion, as I see it, when the legal system places self-defense on a different plane, as it seems you are arguing here.
            Judges issue their orders to the jury, to decide the case on the merits as presented. But they tend, these days, to mandate that the jury consider ONLY the legal statute in question, rather than their own moral understanding of the case, as presented as a conflict of law; jury nullification, despite being the basis of our legal system, is now considered heresy.
            What you seem to be laying out here is that TX code considers self-defense a special legal situation rather than a straight-forward moral situation. As I understand the concept of "burden of proof"or "reasonable doubt", I agree that self-defense is an affirmative justification for breaking the law, based on appeal to the moral law underlying the legal code. But I disagree that that places the burden on the defendant.

            Because a written code cannot account for every last situation in which a citizens may find himself, it can only function as a general guide for behaviors which society disapprobates; it is ultimately for the citizenry to police itself, either with the augmentation of police or by handing down verdicts in petit court cases.
            Sadly, what I see today is the legal system placing itself outside, or even above, the moral code. I suppose this is inevitable in our religiously disintegrating culture, since what we once generally agreed upon we no longer can. But it means that lawyers and judges and police and politicians now have more rein to dictate societal mores when it comes to the law.

            This is what makes me cringe when some say, as eyemale did somewhere in this thread responding to me, that it is scary thinking that citizens have the same powers as police, as though the police ought to have more. This is not the first step toward a police state, it is the last.

        • coyote3

          No, that is not true, in our state the burden is on the state to disprove self defense. Why do you say if you plead self defense the burden is on you, and then state if the evidence shows you are innocent? Indeed, they have to disprove the claim of self defense,. They may be able to do this very easily in some cases, and not so in others, even from the physical evidence, but once you claim that you were in fear of death or great bodily injury, they must disprove that it was not a reasonable fear when you acted.

          • dalek

            Go up one reply. It should be right above yours but you may not have seen it before posting. It has links.

            The laws have changed here in Mississippi too. They are not to far from what Texas has but Texas is better. Here, if someone breaks into your home, you have to testify that you were in fear of bodily injury or for your life or someone else's. You could have a witness do that if you have one. I'm not saying it is hard to do most of the time but you have to be able to prove it, even if it is just your word. I think it is easier in Texas tho. Don't mess with Texans. They have a HUGE amount of property and self defense laws. If I had to move and could pick any place to go, it would be Texas.

            Me, I'm disabled. If I catch a crook in my home and he comes toward me, that is a threat. I only have to state what is in my mind at the time and it be reasonable and believable by a jury. If I shoot him in the back and say he was coming toward me, the evidence doesn't support my claim. I think this is usually done by a Grand Jury here. I'm not certain in Texas.

            Just read the links I posted. I need to research them for here to. They changed a lot of things over the past few years. My brother lives on this property that is in my Mom and my name. I found out that after the changes, he has to have written permission to live there. He shouldn't even have light or water hooked up without written permission. I had no idea that trespass laws and such had gotten that strict here.

          • coyote3

            In Fl., it is true that the defendant must present "some" evidence of self defense, but there is no level of proof involved. He can just assert it. At that time it is the state's burden (beyond a reasonable doubt I might add) to disprove self defense. See the State v. Murray, and State v. Mojito case. Also, since those cases the pattern jury instructions are even a stronger affirmation of this principle.

          • dalek

            A lot of the time, that is all that it requires. The assertion can be enough. Think about it. You are home, someone breaks in and you shoot them. If you were alone, it's your word against no one else's. Odds are high that there is no video, audio or any other proof. Your word is all there is. Even if you did break the law, there is no proof that you did unless there is some compelling evidence, shooting them in the back or something or a witness that was passing by.

            This goes back to what I said a while back in another post somewhere. If I was on a jury, who belongs where? A home owner belongs in their home but a crook doesn't. If it is a car jacking, same thing. The owner of the car belongs there, the car jacker doesn't. This simple analogy works for a LOT of cases. I'm sure prosecutors think about this. Juries are not lawyers, it has to make sense for it to work.

    • intrcptr2

      Police everywhere have that power, or do the police on radar speed trap duty pull over every last car?

      The possibility one might get caught for breaking a law is an important aspect of law enforcement; it is one of the things that keeps the number of officers lower than otherwise. Most people will obey the law because of this uncertainty.

    • eyemale

      your damn right rmh222. gun ownership comes with responsibly . it a terrible thing to take a life , but sometimes it the only choice you have if you want to survive . but even then most people have some kind of remorse and a feeling they wish they didn't have to take that life. with all the so called witness that claim they saw TM on top of GZ not one of them noticed the teen was staying there so the police could let the family know what happen, the teen was treated as a john doe . his dad called the police to file a missing person., meanwhile GZ is free and if it wasn't for the media and the so called race baiters , GZ would be back to his life as usual. like it never even happen.

      • coyote3

        Under the current FL law, a decision was made by the prosecutor. Maybe GZ should be back to life as usual.

    • mlcblog

      Oh, yeah. Come on my property with malice and I have my gun ready, you may get blown away. I don't really care what state I am in.

  • Questions

    "Profiling" is what we do when we mate, among other activities. So George Zimmerman "profiled" Trayvon Martin because, as a black, Martin was extra likely to commit a crime. Hey, News Flash: Blacks DO commit more crime than others — way more. Zimmerman guessed right. And he nearly lost his life as a result of that guess.

    I think of the great line that Jason Statham has in the new movie, "Safe," during a shootout scene with the Russian mob in a NYC subway car. Statham's character says to one of the vicious Russian mobsters, "Someone must have misinformed you when they said I collect garbage. Actually, I dispose of garbage." And then he shoots him. That's what Zimmerman should have told Trayvon Martin before disposing of him.

  • Schlomotion

    I wouldn't be comfortable trying this case out of court, as even deeper digging into the nth generational racial histories of Zimmerman and Martin says more about the media than it does about the case. Mr. Laksin's article is, however, considerably more balanced than the previous ones that have appeared here which tried to weave together all sorts of conspiracies including Sharpton, Obama, Soros, and Karl Marx.

    • Maxie

      Marx was driving the getaway car.

  • sari

    did you have an orgasm when zimmerman was reported to be a Jew (which he isn't)? ya know, your favorite scapegoats?

    • JoJoJams

      Just be happy he didn't bring in the Jews. I think that's one of the first comments (out of hundreds) of his (schlomo..) that is completely reasonable and decent. I'm amazed!

    • ebonystone

      If Zimmerman wants to turn things completely around, he should just announce that he's Moslem, and that Trayvon had insulted "the Prophet". The Moslem trump card out-ranks the Black trump card. Suddenly the leftist establishment is on Zimmerman's side, and Trayvon is the bigot. The Saudi ambassador makes a call to Obama. Case dismissed!

  • Ghostwriter

    The above article was interesting. It's got a lot of good info. Hopefully,this mess will get sorted out soon.

  • trying to help

    Profiling based on “race” or any other physical characteristic is brain-dead stupid. It makes no more sense to profile young black men as burglars than it does to profile all men as rapists or child molesters, or all middle-aged white men as mortgage/securities fraudsters. Racial profiling only makes sense to those hapless souls afflicted by the mental illness of racism.

    • Questions

      There is nothing wrong with profiling as a matter of taking safety precautions. Economist/essayist Thomas Sowell, who is black, has argued precisely the same thing. There is no way one can discern with 100% accurancy the motives of a person or persons we've never met before. But we can make reasonable guesses. Physical characteristics such as age, sex, dress, grooming, and yes, race, provide a basis for such guesses. I'm alive today in part because I've "profiled" black neighborhoods and small gatherings and decided to avoid them.

      Racism, moreover, is not a "mental illness." It's the denial of the reality of race itself that is the illness.

      • trying to help

        “There is no way one can discern with 100% accurancy the motives of a person or persons we’ve never met before. But we can make reasonable guesses. Physical characteristics such as age, sex, … and yes, race, provide a basis for such guesses.” What can such immutable characteristics as age, sex and skin color possibly tell you about a person’s motives? By your logic, we need not judge behavior any longer because it is simpler to judge physical characteristics that people are born with. All whites have the potential of an Adolf Hitler (because they are white), all blacks the potential of Nat Turner (because they are black), all Asians could be the Virginia Tech shooter (because they are Asian), all Arabs the 9/11 hijackers (because they are Arab), and so on. Anyone who would limit their circle of safety or concern based on such characteristics is just, well, limited.

        • dalek

          News flash for you. There had been reports and many discussions about the thefts in the neighborhood prior to this. The people that saw them said they were "black". It is only racism when it is not true. It was a "black" person that was reported to have done the previous breakins.

          If you think knowing a persons race should not have any bearing on this then why did the 911 operator ask for his race? I'm like this, if race doesn't matter, pass a law that makes it illegal for even cops to ask the question. Good luck finding the bad guys if they leave the scene of the crime tho.

          • eyemale

            well for one it helps the police locate the suspect the 911 call was about .

            profiling is like these mini mart store owners think all the shopping lifting is done by blacks because a few have been caught. doing it so everytime one comes in they follow and watch them down every row. if you were black and innocent you would be annoyed and insulted by this . the acts of a few don't speak for the whole race. no one here would like to be treated or thought of as criminal because people of your race committed bad acts..

          • dalek

            But if they ask for the race, that is racist and profiling according to you. If the police can ask, then the people can use the same info too. The people that live there already knew it was blacks that had done the breaking in prior to this mess. They needed to be looking for blacks. Isn't that what you just said the police needed to? If one can have that information, then the other can use it too.

            As someone else pointed out, blacks commit more crimes. I wish it wasn't so but it is. That's why they get caught at it. They are doing it.

          • eyemale

            profiling is when you think stereotypes thoughts about people based on skin color or race
            with your logic the police shouldn't even ask if it a man or woman. calling 911 because you think all blacks are thieves is racist and profiling. the police asking for a description of the person you are calling about isn't profiling

          • trying to help

            News flash for you: The fact that all the rape victims you know were raped by males does not in any way suggest that every male you see should be suspected of rape. Most intelligent people have no trouble with that logic unless there’s some irrational fear of men at play. If you understand this logic but fail to understand the error in racial profiling, then you are afflicted with the mental illness of racism. There is an irrational fear of other “races” at play. No one is suggesting that physical description is irrelevant when you’re looking for a specific person, but there is a huge difference between looking for someone with a certain skin color and predicting someone’s behavior based on that skin color. The latter can sometimes get you 25-life.

          • dalek

            True but you forget a few things. Keep in mind, Zimmerman was going by the same description that had been given to police about the prior break ins. He was actually going more on the way he was acting than his race because even in the 911 call, he wasn't sure if he was black or not. It's not racism when you don't know a persons race.

            The whole point I am making is this. We don't know that Martin is as innocent as some claim him to be. I'm still open to the idea that Zimmerman may have did something he shouldn't but so far, I have not seen anything that supports the idea.

          • eyemale

            you are truly open to idea GZ did something he shouldn't of , you would of seen by now , cause it been there from day one.

          • dalek

            If evidence shows up that Zimmerman was in the wrong, then fine, he was in the wrong. Based on what I know right now, Zimmerman was doing what he was supposed to be doing, watching the neighborhood.

            You have said nothing that changes that yet. At least not based on facts or evidence.

    • intrcptr2

      You work for TSA, don't you?

      Profiling IS NOT stereotyping

  • maleman01

    A lot of good comments so far, but also some that are an emotional-needs response and some that only scratch the surface or miss the point. Everyone has a different, usually subjective, viewpoint.

    What happened during the altercation remains to be seen. Only GZ knows what happened. Hopefully he will be judged fairly and not on the basis of racism or politics. Hope he has a good lawyer.

  • mlcblog

    Too little, too late. However, I'll take it. Good for Reuters to engage in some actual journalism and try to report something close to the truth.

    I heard all of this and more in the very early hours of this event. Most of it was dropped by the complicit news media who love to stir up racial trouble.

    • eyemale

      why can't be seeking justice for a family who believes their son was murdered?

      down the street from me is a small store who has a sign on one of the coolers that says "SEX ( in big letters) and goes on to say …..now that I have your attention… please take from the front"

      get the point I am making?

      • dalek

        If Zimmerman wasn't armed, would Martin have got any justice then? Most likely he would have ran away and George would have had the worst kind of justice. Murdered, for being a neighborhood watchman and trying to protect his community. Yea, that's justice but not the right kind.

        • eyemale

          what are you saying ? that TM would of beat GZ to death? it hard to kill someone with your bare hands unless the person just lays there . to beleive GZ story you have to beleive the teen who he called 911 on and was looking for some how surprized him ( in a open area) and knock him down with one punch. WOW that is some teen. true TM was 6.3 but he only weighted 150 pounds , I am 6 feet tall and weight 183 pounds and I doubt I could knock anyone down with one punch. look at the cell phone picture took of GZ head right after the fight, GZ is standing and on his cell phone, there is no picture of his face showing he was beat up . so based on the back of the head does it look like life threating cuts? standing and on the cell mins after a terrible BEATING. GZ is amazing

          • cjk

            You say you're 6 foot and 183 pounds and can't knock someone down with a punch?
            Okay you're either: 1) A liar
            2)One of the biggest limp-wristed faqqots ever.
            In either case you have zero credibility.

          • dalek

            I agree. Someone put Zimmerman on the ground. Of the witness reports I have seen in news reports, the only two there are Martin and Zimmerman. So, unless someone thinks Zimmerman layed on the ground and banged his own head on the ground, I'm thinking Martin did that.

          • eyemale

            there was a fight that is for sure , but who started it is unknown. beating someone head on the sidewalk ( in self defense) isn't ok. the only acceptable self defense is shooting them and killing them. if proven GZ was the aggressor, would TM been in the right for beating his head on the sidewalk in self defense?

          • dalek

            If someone jumps on me and is banging my head on the ground, yea, I'd shoot them. I'd do it in a second or even less. Actually, I'd go a bit further than that. I'd have shot him before I got knocked to the ground. To me, when someone attempts to hit me, I can defend myself. As I posted before. I look for who belongs where. Zimmerman was where he belonged. He was doing what he was supposed to be doing. Martin was there doing what?

            Another problem you have, there are witnesses that Martin jumped Zimmerman. Last I heard, there was three and one was on the news. I think there was another but they didn't show their faces just their voices. I have yet to hear of a single witness that says Zimmerman was jumping on Martin.

          • eyemale

            no one saw what started the fight . being on top just means that guy was winning , doesn't mean he started it or wasn't protecting himself .

          • dalek

            But Zimmerman was in his neighborhood doing what the people that live there wanted him to do.

          • eyemale

            you mean the people in his neighborhood wanted zimmerman to follow this teen and kill him ? if so I say there are alot of other charges to make to a lot of other people

          • dalek

            No. That is silly of you to even think that. He was doing what a person in neighborhood watch should be doing, watching suspicious persons and calling 911. The shooting part wasn't expected. It most likely wasn't expected by anyone. I doubt Zimmerman expected that bloody nose and the rest either when he volunteered for neighborhood watch.

          • eyemale

            an armed man follows a teen he claims is on dope or has something wrong with him and you think the shooting wasn't expected? I think zimmerman only had the balls to follow the teen because he did have a gun. if TM knew who zimmerman was you think things still would of went the way they did.. I believe TM got concern and annoyed with the fact some stranger was following him. I also believe GZ had his gun at the really, GZ claimed he was scared. people who are scared don't run around buildings and blind spots with out some kind of protection at the ready.

          • dalek

            Do I think Zimmerman was planning to shoot someone that night, no. I think Zimmerman was doing what he was supposed to be doing. He had a responsibility to find out as much as he could about someone messing around his neighborhood. As I have said many times before, if Zimmerman didn't follow him and let 911 know where he was, what he was doing and describe him as best as he could, then I wouldn't want him watching my neighborhood. Most likely, I'd do it myself. I'd volunteer for the job. I wouldn't want to be in Zimmermans situation right now but if it happened, then it happened.

            I want to point out something to you that happened about 30 years ago, back when crime is NOTHING like it is now. They were doing construction for a local highway which included a new bridge. They got my Dad to watch over the equipment. He did. He took his little camper and watched over the place. My Dad was a preacher. I say was because he is no longer with us. He knew just about everyone worth knowing. Lots of people knew him too. Do you think he went down there to watch over the equipment unarmed? No, he was armed. He carried a pistol every time he went down there. Did he ever use it. No. Nobody ever came around. Thing is, if someone did, he would have done what he was supposed to. He would approach whoever was there and ask them what they are doing there. Would he have just followed someone, no he wouldn't. He wouldn't have called the cops either since he had no phone. This was long before cell phones was around. Even if there was a cell phone, the Sheriff dept is 15 minutes away even with lights and siren. All he had was himself, his sense of responsibility and some good God given sense.

            It seems to me that Zimmerman took that seriously. He didn't intend for all this to happen but he did what he felt he had to at the time. I for one will not second guess his decision just because someone of a different race got killed. I would say exactly the same if the races were reversed.

            If there is new evidence that proves Zimmerman was in the wrong, then fine. Right now, I don't see that. I have some questions about Martin but no answers so I'm just going on what I got.

          • eyemale

            have to post this in parts

            Thank for the story of your Dad, but here is the difference,

            TM was in a residential area where he had a right to be because he was visiting and staying with a resident who lived there. TM was seen walking down a sidewalk in an open area , and not in a place where it would of been strange for him to be , like behind homes , near a open window or whatever. GZ seen the teen when he was driving to the store ( in the rain) GZ called 911 and reported a real suspicious guy,that looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. and He’s got his hands in his waist band.GZ also claims Something’s wrong with him. .and He’s got something in his hands.

          • eyemale

            clearly GZ is describing a individual to be concerned about . may be on dope ,something wrong with him something in his hands , got his hands in his waist band . so GZ does what every person would do when dealing with a possible armed and dangerous person. his gets out of his truck and follows him LOL…this act is either the act of a very brave man or a stupid one . a 3rd possibility would be GZ gave hyped up info about TM thinking the police would come sooner. at this point GZ knows the size of the suspect , is concern about the teen where abouts "Zimmerman .It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is" like the teen could be hiding some where close by. so I ask you at this point You think GZ has his gun at the ready ?

          • eyemale

            shorty after if you believe GZ story he on the way back to his truck. and by surprise this very odd acting teen he was so concerned and worried about catches him by surprise. and punches him ( somewhere in the face so hard it knocks him down) maybe the teen was also a ninja. the ground is wet( sound of foot steps) it night so it must be pretty quite, GZ senses have to be hyped up, but still out of no where the teen is "poof" in GZ face.

            Heres the bottom line GZ story doesn't pan out . except the details about he saw a teen . GZ profiled this teen as a criminal ( not saying racial) but as a criminal , and an armed , untrained , non law enforcement official, took matters in to his own hands and followed an unarmed teen based on his paranoid delusional thoughts that ended up the caused of the death of a minor. if there was ever a threat to GZ he caused it himself.

          • dalek

            It is very possible that Martin could have sneaked back up on Zimmerman. Even in my own yard, I can walk on it and not make a sound. The only hope is if I step on a stick or something and it breaks and it makes noise. Otherwise, I could sneak up on anyone in my yard. I don't keep my front yard picked up and mowed like some do but I bet the folks in that gated community does. From what I saw, it looked like a pretty well off area. They may not be millionaires but able to keep the yards mowed and picked up better than I do.

            Your bottom line is just your opinion based on thoughts. I have a question for you. When this story first broke, all the Democrats was talking about it and backing up Martin. As things started coming out about Martin, his history and other things, they started shutting up. Why, would be a good question for you to think about. I think it is because they realized that Martin was not the innocent kid they first thought. That picture of when he was 12 that was first shown was not the same person that tangled with Zimmerman. Martin had a lot of legal issues, school issues and was MUCH larger.

            As I said before, based on what I know right now, I'm with Zimmerman. If the evidence changes then I'll reevaluate my opinion then. Otherwise, you are not changing my mind based on your opinion. I basing mine on the facts.

            Have a nice day.

          • eyemale

            yeah but like I said GZ senses are hyped up (sight , earing), heart racing, thoughts going a mile a minute ( where is this guy go , where is he) doubt he walked back to his truck all calm and whistling.

          • dalek

            Zimmerman may be pumped up but it doesn't matter. I have seen in interviews from family that Zimmerman was walking back to his vehicle after 911 told him not to follow. Time will tell if that is fact but right now, that's the info. Me, I would have told 911 that I'm staying here until the police arrive. It's not illegal to follow someone as I posted in my call about the drunk driver.

            If Zimmerman turned around and was going back to his vehicle and Martin confronted Zimmerman, Martin is the aggressor. Once Zimmerman walked away, he's no longer following him or being any sort of threat, not that he was to begin with either. I would say that even if Zimmerman was still following Martin, it is still not a threat.

          • dalek

            Him getting out of his truck following Martin and watching what he was doing was his responsibility as neighborhood watch. Just as was calling 911. Was he hoping the police would get there sooner, I would think so. That's reasonable to me.

            If I was following someone acting all weird and the police seems to be taking their time, I'd be ready for whatever could happen, even if it was only a remote chance. Anything less would be stupid on Zimmermans part.

            When I go walking at night, I carry a knife with me. If I hear something, I have the knife in my hand, ready, just in case. Yea, if I was Zimmerman, I'd be ready for whatever could happen too. You never know what these kids will do nowadays. Heck, I'm not sure about some adults.

            Just to also add, I'm saving up to buy my own pistol. When I get the pistol, I'll be carrying it when I go walking. That knife may not be enough and is only for close up action. A gun allows more distance from whatever may be coming at me. Just so you know, we have wild animals here. I could also have someone drive by and start something tho. I could also walk up on a crook too. Like Zimmerman, I'd like options available to me if any of these things happen. No one has a crystal ball that works every time.

          • eyemale

            no.. the 911 call clearly points out that following the suspect wasn't one of his his responsibility. we also have neighborhood watch where I live , we were told the same thing watch and report , and not advisable to follow or try to apprehend a suspect.

          • dalek

            I never said Zimmerman was trying to apprehend Martin. Actually, I said the opposite. Zimmerman was watching Martin. That's all. According to the 911 tape, he never even tried to talk to Martin.

            If your neighborhood watch says that, you don't have much of a neighborhood watch. I'd just buy me a toy dog and put him on the front steps. Maybe have one that barks when it detects motions or something. LOL So funny.

            The reason police tell you or anyone else not to follow someone is because the police can get sued if they don't. I called 911 about 6 months ago for a drunk driver. The 911 lady told me not to follow them, even tho I had been behind him for a few miles already and I was not passing him with him driving like that. I told her that I understand but I'm going to try to get close enough to get the tag number when he gets to the red light, which was red. When I gave her the tag number, she thanked me for the info and told me that they can not ask a person to do anything for legal reasons. If a person chooses to do it anyway, it's not illegal to do it. It's just that the police are not responsible if you get hurt.

          • eyemale

            you left out following which GZ was told to not do which what we were told . we have signs stating it a neighborhood watch ( area) the idea of the program is to let a would be-thief know they are being watched , or someone may be watching. and they move on to an easier un monitored neighborhood.

          • dalek

            You are still missing the point. Zimmerman continuing to follow is NOT illegal or a threat to anyone. Read my post about my 911 call to report a drunk driver. It's the same reason youo can no longer get medical help when you call 911. You used to be able to call 911 and them tell you how to perform CPR. Not any more tho. They can't tell you to put your hand over a wound to stop the bleeding now. Why? If they make a mistake, they can be sued. It's cheaper to let the person die for their part. It's also cheaper to let a theif just walk away without any description or anything.

            I'll tell you something that happened to me a few years back. I know most of this family. They had lived up the road for several years. The guys Dad and me are big buds and we do all sorts of things together, still do. I was talking to him one day on the phone and he mentioned that his son and daughter-in-law had split up the day before. She went to her parents and he was somewhere else. Basically, the house was empty and would be for a while. I wasn't asked to do anything, nor was I told to do anything, NOTHING was even mentioned about me doing anything just that they were gone. I did however have a key to the place and when they went out of town, I checked the place about every day and changed the lights up to make it look lived in. It had been a while since they went anywhere since they were having problems and had been for a good while. I suspect they forgot I even had the key. None of us thought to give it back or ask for it back.

            Anyway, about a week later, I was doing my 'walkabout' and was walking by the home. I saw a van that I had not seen there before. I had no idea who it belonged to and I had never even seen it in our nighborhood either. Did I walk on and do nothing? Did I call 911? Nope. I walked across the yard, up the steps and right into the house where these strangers were. My first words was something to the effect, 'My name is Dale, I live up the road. The folks that live here are gone and who are you and what are you doing here?' The lady spoke up and gave me her name. She actually knew me by name but I didn't know her. Even tho, I asked questions. I asked for the guys name that lives there and she gave it. She also knew the names of the folks that had split up, their kids name and other folks that they should have known. Turned out she was my friends ex and the guy was her new hubby. We talked a bit and when I knew all was well, I left. If they had not known the names of people and belonged there, believe me, they would have been leaving, 911 or not. I might add, empty handed too.

            Here is the kicker. Even tho I sort of walked in on them and gave them a shock, they thanked me for watching over the place while it is empty. By the way, I got a call later on from the lady that lived there. She heard what happened. She thanked me too. She even appologized for not calling to let me know that there was going to be people there doing some cleaning and picking up some clothes and such. I bet when she went to sleep that night, she was not worried about her place. She knew I was watching it for them until they got things sorted out.

            Again, if you live in a neighborhood that would do any different, I'm glad I don't live there. I take pride in the fact that when I leave here to go out of town, hospital or something that this old place will be here when I get back and all the stuff in it too. There may be some crook sitting in jail or even waiting on a autopsy but my place is here. That's the kind of neighbors I have here. That's what Zimmerman was trying to do in my opinion.

          • eyemale

            GZ following was a serious threat to TM , GZ involvement was a big factor in TM death. and now our country once again is in race battle that could have a serious out come when the race melting pot boils over .

          • dalek

            Zimmerman was no threat to Martin when he was following him. Are you claiming that following somone is the same as pointing a gun at them or swinging a bat at them or pointing a knife at them or trying to punch someone? Those are VERY different things. If Martin was up to something then yea, Zimmerman was a threat but only if Martin was up to something. The only threat was that Martin may be caught by police and arrested.

            The only reason this is a race issue is because people have made it into one. I posted this before. If Zimmerman was black and Martin was white/hispanic or whatever, I would say the same thing.

          • eyemale

            some stranger following me I would find a bit threating, especially back when I was 17 and it was an older man , night , raining and no one else around .

          • dalek

            I wouldn't unless I was somewhere I shouldn't be or was doing or about to do something I shouldn't be doing. It didn't bother me one bit when I walked up into that house to find out who was there. To me, I was doing the right thing.

          • eyemale

            is that what you would tell your teen , if some strange man follows you don't worry or feel threaten?

          • dalek

            I don't have kids but if I did, sure. As long as they have distance and whoever is not trying to make some sort of contact, don't worry about it. From what I saw of the current picture of Martin, he didn't look like a teen to me. He was but he didn't look it.

            I'm sure at some point I have been followed but I don't sweat it. As long as I am somewhere I should be and am not doing something I shouldn't be doing, I could care less who follows me. Let them get bored to tears watching me doing nothing. lol It's their life to waste.

          • eyemale

            it not about being innocent of being where you should be , it about you are being followed and why. you wonder what the guy wants or what he is going to do if he catches you. you might run , you might confront him. you don't just blow it off and skip Merrily home with out a care in the world.

            like all zimmerman supporters you make every excuse in the book to defend him. you don't know him but yet you feel he is beyond fault. and he is right simply because he has a story and TM doesn't . when talking about TM you don't allow any excuses , or possibilities . he was just a violent punk out looking for trouble and a fight. whatever happen to the expression it takes two to tango?

          • dalek

            I'm not making excuses. I stating facts and using common sense.

            It does take two tango. I'm glad you FINALLY realize that part. All Martin had to do, was keep walking.

          • eyemale

            all GZ had to do is never start walking , report what he saw and wait for police .

          • dalek

            Others in the neighborhood had already did what you want. That did not work out since they never could catch them. That is the reason Zimmerman volunteered to help watch the neighborhood.

            Nothing you have said points to any wrong doing by Zimmerman so far. If you have no new facts, you're not changing my opinion any. You want to keep claiming Zimmerman should have not volunteered for neighborhood watch then fine. I'm going to post rebuttals to your claims if they are not factual or don't make sense. It's your time. Care to keep wasting it?

          • eyemale

            neighborhood "watch" not neighborhood seek and capture . one of these days you might come across a Zimmerman type who over zealously concerns him self with your activities. and treats you like public enemy number one . then tell me how you feel.

          • dalek

            He wasn't trying to capture Zimmerman. He was watching him and reporting to 911 what he was doing, where he was and giving a description as best as he could.

            If someone ever breaks into your home and steals everything you worked for, then you may want someone like Zimmerman or me to "watch" over you neighborhood too.

          • dalek

            Are you claiming Zimmerman was lying about seeing Martin? Unless Zimmerman was outright lying, nothing wrong with this at all.

          • eyemale

            how do you know what was going thru GZ head? he was following the teen and he was armed
            I am not knocking GZ from calling 911 , that what anyone should do if they see something they feel is strange . they call , they explain what they saw , and wait for the police . GZ admitted the teen saw him , if the teen was really there to rip someone off you think he still would have committed a crime after being spotted? even if this teen was responsible for past thefts what could the police do unless he had stolen goods on him or was in the in act. and as it known TM had nothing on him except candy and and ice tea. GZ wrongfully accused and stalked an innocent teen. I ready don't think that the idea behind neighborhood watch programs. if it is than it a dangerous
            practice left to ordinary citizens who run around accusing and stalking other citizens for no other reason than a thought of " that guy walking over there doesn't seem right to me"

          • eyemale

            every time a high profile case where someone ends up dead and there is opinion it was unnecessary, the anti gun lobbyist make a case for more gun restrictions. people who support GZ should asks themselves do we really want to stand by what this guy did. he took unnecessary risks that resulted in the death of a teen.

            stand your ground wasn't put in place so armed citizens can run around playing vigilante. the anti gun supporters already have statistics claiming an armed citizen takes more chances and risks than an unarmed citizen. guns shouldn't replace brians and guts.

          • dalek

            From what I have read, he is claiming self defense. That is not the same as stand your ground. To me, either could apply because they are basically the same thing.

            I read a article a bit ago that some info was leaked from a police document. In it the claim was that Martin was trying to grab Zimmermans gun. I also read elsewhere that there was burns from when the gun was shot. That tells me that Martin was right on Zimmerman. Time will tell if those two clues are true or not.

          • eyemale

            GZ said TM was trying to get his gun . But got to remember GZ just shot TM and needed a reason to claim self defense . the shot that killed TM was from a foot away. whats that prove? we already know GZ shot him in a scruggle. but who started it . there also TM's GF cell call who said she heard TM ask some man if he was following him. and hears a mans voice say no then a scruggle and the call ended. if that is true then there was no sneak attack on TM part. it could be possible TM did walk up to GZ and asked about following him and GZ freaked out in fear and pulled his gun or started to go for his gun and that when TM hit him or though GZ to the ground because of fear for TM live.

          • dalek

            The reports I read says Martin hit Zimmerman and then Zimmerman shot Martin.

            If Zimmerman had been following this guy for a while, why would he approach him later on? Me, if I'm going to confront someone, I do it right away. If I'm just going to watch and report, then I'm just going to watch and report, unless that person comes to me and threatens me in some way.

            I'm sure none of that makes sense to you tho. I'm almost certain it doesn't.

          • eyemale

            your not getting it. the report is GZ story, the teen doesn't have a story because the teen is dead. no one saw who started what. but there is a witness( 2 girls that live above where TM was shot) that said they heard loud voices between two men. then a gun shot. once again if there was a conversation, then there was no sneak attack.

          • dalek

            It is obvious that Martin doesn't have a story. Jeez. If someone breaks into my home and I kill him, he doesn't have one either. If a cop kills someone, he doesn't have a story either. Does that automatically make Zimmerman, me or the cop guilty? Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

            How do you know there was no sneak attack?

          • eyemale

            it doesn't make you guilty because the man you shot broke in your home . TM didn't break into a home he was shot in a court yard . GZ CLAIMS TM caught him by surprise. TM's GF CLAIMS she heard TM ask someone if they were following him. if that is true how can it be GZ was attacked by surprised . if I walk up to you and start talking to you and we end up in a fight, then you can't claim I came out of no where and attacked you.

          • dalek

            Then if Martin approached Zimmerman, who is to say that Martin didn't also decide to attack him? I said in a earlier post that one report by a witness heard Martin ask Zimmerman if he 'had a problem'. Zimmerman said 'no.' Martin was heard to say that 'you do know'. IF that is true, IF, that sounds like Martin was about to jump Zimmerman which makes Martin the agressor at that point.

            Again, following someone is not a threat or even illegal. Hitting someone, knocking them to the ground, breaking their nose and banging their head on the ground is not just a threat, it's assault.

          • eyemale

            LOL dude ,,,it was GZ who said that what TM said , not a witness , all there is a witness to is someone yelling for help.

            a threat is in the eyes of the beholder. you can't determine what other people feel threaten by. following or stalking someone can be considered threating. you don't beleive me hang out at a high school and follow a kid home. if they happen to call the police , the police will question you about it .

            if TM walked up to GZ and asked him if he was following him , and GZ went for his gun and the teen thought he was going to be shot , wouldn't that be a good reason to jump on GZ and beat his head?

          • dalek

            The police would question me and then release me. Why, following someone is not illegal.

            Who says Zimmerman pulled the gun first? What if, Zimmerman was hit by Martin first then Zimmerman shot to defend himself? Zimmerman had fight injuries, Martin doesn't. Makes me think Martin threw the first punches. There is nothing that says otherwise that I have seen or read.

          • eyemale

            pretty sure I can grab your head and beat on the ground with out causing any signs of injuries to myself.

            but lets go with your theroy that TM hit GZ so hard he broken GZ nose and caused GZ to fall to the ground, wouldn't there be injuries to TM fist. or something that says he struck someone?

            and the police would take a report on you because it involves a minor you was following.

            beleive me when I say it is not wise for anyone to follow/stalk anyone. and really not wise if you are armed and follow/stalk anyone.

            following /stalking with intent to harm is illegal.

          • dalek

            If you can hit someone and not cause any signs of injuries to yourself, couldn't Martin have done the same thing? Couldn't Martin hit Zimmerman and not have any injuries to himself, even his fist? Your first paragraph pretty much kills your theory in your second paragraph. Plus, there is nothing to prove your theory either. We have proof that Zimmerman has injuries. All Martin has is the gun shot wounds. If Zimmerman's injuries came first, then Zimmerman was attacked by Martin. Once Martin touched Zimmerman, Martin was the aggressor. It's not assault until someone is actually touched. Following and watching is not touching.

            As to your claim of intent to harm, who says Zimmerman was intending to harm Martin? Based on what I have read, Zimmerman intended to follow Martin until the Police got there.

          • eyemale

            I didn't say hit you , I said GRAB YOUR HEAD AND BEAT IT ON THE GROUND.

            dude whats the point here , you don't listen , you mis quote me . you state facts that are not facts. but if you want facts , heres some about your pal GZ

          • eyemale

            in four of the recordings Zimmerman called police to report "suspicious" persons — all of whom were black — in or near the Retreat at Twin Lakes neighborhood.

            He called once to report his neighbor's open garage door. And in the sixth call, Zimmerman reports children are "habitually" playing in the street at dusk and running in front of cars. He asked dispatchers to take his complaint anonymously, but provided his name and phone number.
            and oh yes the big yellow bike wheelie caper

          • eyemale

            According to a records search on George, he was previously arrested for domestic violence, resisting an officer without violence and most shockingly, resisting an officer with violence — a felony charge that surely could have landed him in prison. daddy the judge had them dropped. GZ can't keep jobs, that why he is 28 and living at home and his 1st two lawyers said this about him, we can't defend him because he doesn't listen. he called FOX and Corey after we told him not to. or to talk to anyone.

            your boy GZ does what he wants when he wants because he thinks daddy can save him

          • dalek

            We will just have to wait and see what the Jury says. I predict that Zimmerman will walk. I certainly don't see the current charges sticking. We will see.

          • eyemale

            we can test my theory if you want? you be GZ and I will be TM

  • WilliamJamesWard

    How the evidence falls out does not dispense with all of the hype which is 99% racist stereotyping,_1% whatever. Facts are what should be moving the authorities and not political hash, the prosecutor_is getting her half hour of fame or infamy. Zimmerman guilty or not guilty is being pilloried in the MSM_and so much so it is doubtful he could get a fair trial due to the poisoning of peoples minds and_all of the disinformation played out in the media. What is most disturbing is the exposure to all of_the useless, worthless street vermin who are real criminals in their minds and actions using this_sad happening as and excuse to vent their life long programmed hatreds…………….William

  • Tanstaaflzjohn

    If he was hit, you must acquit.

  • RonCarnine

    This case points out the fallacy of fairness in American society. I still wonder if we will ever have someone call the prosecutor's behavior into question. Charging GZ with 2nd degree murder is ridiculous. The elements of that charge are not there. The prosecutor filed that charge to appease the black community. That is not the way its supposed to work. GZ is considered innocent until proven guilty. I believe, this is my opinion as a 16 yr. career cop, that the prosecutor should have taken this case to a grand jury. I further believe it wasn't taken to the grand jury because they would not have indicted GZ for 2nd degree murder. So the process was by-passed to give the prosecutor the opportunity to file her charge. Voluntary or involuntary manslaughter would have been a charge that would have been much more provable but it would have infuriated the black community so the correct charge wasn't filed. I'm not saying GZ is guilty of that, but it would have been a much more appropriate charge. There is a reason that Lady Justice is presented holding the scales of justice blindfolded. Charges should be filed on the basis of available evidence, not based on appeasing family members or "community activists". Let the cops finish their investigation, present the evidence to a grand jury and let the chips fall where they may. Justice should apply to GZ as much as it should to TM.

    • trying to help

      The prosecutor did not overcharge. Elements of 2nd degree murder are a dead body, a suspect who did something intentionally to cause that death, and a depraved mind indifferent to human life. Here we have a dead unarmed teenager, a confessed shooter, and evidence the kid was shot while screaming for help. If Zimmerman can’t prove either self-defense or insanity (and the burden of proof’s on him), then he’s a wrap for the next 25 years.

      • eyemale

        not sure the screams was proven( or not proven) to be TM Or GZ unless I missed something new . everything else you said I agree with . I think GZ lawyers are going to have a hard time controlling him , it appears GZ don't like to listen to anyone and likes to do things his way ( reason the 1st two lawyers bailed on him) that why I think when he said "OK" on the 911 tapes he kept following. far as his story I remember what my dad always said , believe only 60% what you read and 40% what people tell you.

        • trying to help

          Zimmerman definitely kept looking for the kid after telling the dispatcher “OK”. The reason I know this is because he couldn’t tell the dispatcher where the cops could meet him. He asked the dispatcher to have the cops call him when they arrived to find out where he’d be. He was planning to be wherever he found the kid.

          • eyemale

            I agree, there also a knocking sound ( like knocking on someone door) a few times right around that time he said ok, and just wants police to call him.

      • coyote3

        At this time, it has not been established who was screaming for held. No, the burden is not on Zimmerman for self defense, that is not FL law. The state must disprove the claim of self defense. Now, they may be able to do that, but it is their burden.

        • trying to help

          No, a self defense claim is an affirmative defense, meaning you agree you committed the act but it was justified. Affirmative defenses must be proven by the defendant. Say I bust a window, climb in the back of a woman’s house and walk out with a safe in my arms. The cops catch me and I claim the house is mine but registered in my wife’s name, and I’d left my keys at work and needed something in my safe. I’d better be able to prove every word of that or I’m going up for burglary. The state does not have to prove me wrong to send me up. All the state has to prove are the elements of burglary, easy because they caught me in the act. The burden of proving legal justification for that act is all mine. This is why Zimmerman is realistically facing 25-life. He has to prove both that the kid attacked him and that this unarmed kid was beating him to death. Fat chance of that.

          • coyote3

            No, the burden under the Florida law is the state's, once self defense is asserted. Of course you have to "claim" self defense and state how you feared death or great bodily harm, but from that point the state must disprove it.

          • coyote3

            That is not even a good buglary case, under the facts you gave.

          • coyote3

            See the FL jury instructions on self defense, the burden is on the state. Also, see State v. Murray, and State v. Mojito

  • Daddio

    Has anyone investigated whether the crime wave has continued in Zimmerman’s neighborhood since the demise of Travon?

    Did his death result in a sudden drop in the crimes being committed there?

    • eyemale

      I am guessing it might since it known you can get shot for buying candy and walking thru the neighborhood

  • mrbean

    Yassah, Trayvon wass a goot chile, an her only beez arrested five times, yonowatahsayin' mettt….metttt.metttt.

    • Ghostwriter

      Please ditch the "Amos n' Andy routine. It's never been funny and it never really had any charm at all.

  • eyemale

    OK zimmerman supporters, lets think out side the box, lets say zimmerman's story is the same has it now , but TM survived , when asked why he attacked GZ he said because GZ went for his gun . who would you believe and why?

    • mrbean

      I would believe Zimmerman because Martin attacked him and fell on the gun and the trigger got stuck and it went off 10 times. heh heh heh

      • eyemale

        funny….. lets share that one with TM's family and the so called race baiters to show they are right , that the death of their son is just a big joke that doesn't deserve the attention and justice they seek.

    • cjk

      We already have considered all the facts, what we would like is for you also to consider all the facts, but alas your racism won't allow it.

      • eyemale

        and what facts are those ? the ramblings of GZ?

  • http://www.maghrebchristians.com Youssef

    The French finance ministry froze the assets of a radical imam from Tunisia who is under the threat of expulsion for anti-Semitism, an official announcement said on Saturday.

    Read more: http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/05/06/franc

    Youssef

  • http://www.maghrebchristians.com Youssef

    Algeria’s parties prepared their final rallies ahead of the May 10 legislative polls Sunday, after the Arab Spring sweeping the region failed to bring new faces to the campaign and spark the electorate.

    Read more: http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/05/06/alger

    Youssef

  • Nick Shaw

    No, but when 20 blacks swarm your store and start racing among the shelves are you allowed to "profile" them as a bunch of thieves?
    Would you have, as a store owner, a legitimate reason to profile?
    What kind of rainbow encrusted world do you live in, Helen?
    Even black store owners profile black men that enter their establishments! Even lone black men.
    Get your head out of the sand! There is a problem in the black community. By suggesting you cannot profile (leaving aside hiring practices which are enforced by law) you are simply ignoring the problem.
    It's akin to ignoring the fact that muslims make up the bulk of aircraft hijackings and terrorism in this world yet, pointing this out and acting on such information shouldn't be allowed 'cause it's profiling.
    You are asking for you own blind demise, Helen. But, that's what liberals do.

    • eyemale

      if 20 of anything swarm my store that the leaning factor , not the color of their skin. that example has nothing to do with profiling.

      • Nick Shaw

        Really? Twenty white highschool kids in track uniforms coming through the door of your store compared to 20 black kids in butt dragging pants and hoodies would have exactly the same effect on your thought processes?
        Now you are just lying to yourself, Helen.

        • trying to help

          I’m with eyemale, not sure how the color of their skin would affect my thought processes or responses. Why should they? How would they be different for you? Really, I just don’t get it. What would you do differently in those two cases?

        • eyemale

          where I live mini marts have signs saying no more that 3 in a group of teen in the store at the same time because of the chance of shop lifting , you are being bias in your profiling. white kids also wear hoodies and baggy pants. a group of 20 would cause me concern , but once again not because of color of skin but the number it self.

  • popseal

    Is it double jeopardy to tried by the media twice for the same crime? ha ha My 46 years of adult observation have taught me to never believe any media first reports about almost anything and absolutely never buy Al Sharpton's rap.

  • coyote3

    That is not the kind profiling we are talking about and you know it. It is quite another to recognize that in many situations, you WILL be looking for a person of a certain race/ethnicity, in all likelihood, than to deny someone employment based on their race. In fact, under certain circumstances the owner of a business may deny employment based on race, not that it is relevant to this discussion. The civil rights act(s) only prohibit discrimination if certain criteria is present.

    • eyemale

      In a 1968 ruling by the United States Supreme Court

      Law enforcement may stop citizens without probable cause to arrest, if there is a reasonable suspicion that the suspect was, is, or is about to be involved in a crime.
      An officer may stop and frisk some one if there is reasonable suspicion that the suspect is carrying a weapon and that s/he or others are in danger of physical injury.

      Racial profiling, including being stopped and harassed for “driving while black” is a violation of your constitutional rights — it is against the law no matter how the police try to defend their actions.