17 year old kid shot dead by Neighborhood Watch "Captain"

[Bunnykid68]

Not likely.

Next time he shows up there will be plenty of sheep hanging onto every word the bastard has to say. Those that point out what he is doing will be declared bigots, racists, etc.

I would like to see JJ cut off fearless leader's balls like he said he wanted to though. Of course, fearless leader would have to convince michelle to let him get them out of the jar first.

OK, I admit I am a racists. Now on with the neutering

 

[dross]

My hatred for busy bodies stems from the fact that I should be free from harassment from my government as well as citizens. With the myriad of things that can land you on the terrorist watch list nowadays, how are we going to feel when being questioned by LE and civilian alike? Are you a prepper? Terrorist. Do you believe in the Constitution? Terrorist. Do you believe in Religion? Terrorist. Do you believe in the Right To Keep and Bear Arms? Terrorist.

How many of us here fit those descriptions? Should we have to watch over our shoulders waiting for LE or civilians to ask us our business or for our papers? I believe that time is coming. Even though haven't committed a crime, you fit those descriptions so we're going to watch and spy on you.

Just because some may share the same descriptors or beliefs that I do and commit a crime, it doesn't mean that I'm a criminal as well. I don't think I would have gotten the same treatment from Zimmerman that Martin got. I don't like being profiled as a criminal so I don't like going around profiling others as criminals if they haven't committed a crime.

I agree with you on this. I've read your reasoning about when you would help your neighbors, and I understand your reasoning, though I would do differently.

Trayvon had a right to be there. In the world we live in, however, an unknown black male is going to be looked at with suspicion in a lot of situations. That's the facts, I'm not defending that state of the world, just noting it.

Zimmerman had a right to take an active interest in his neighborhood. Apparently he had reason to be suspicious of people, if they'd really had some crime increases.

Maybe Zimmerman followed him. I won't say that's something he should have done, but he should know it had risks.

So, let's say that Trayvon had a right to walk through a neighborhood, and Martin had a right to check him out. Martin should have known that being a young black male, some people are going to look at him unfairly. Zimmerman should have known that following someone around that HE HIMSELF thought was up to no good, could result in a confrontation. He also should have known that being armed added another element to this that could complicate matters.

So far we have two people who are in a situation they both should know could get dicey, yet both have remained within the law and within their rights.

Someone stepped across a line. Someone was wrong. Someone went outside of their rights and touched someone else's body. Someone initiated force.

If it was Martin who initiated the force, for all practical purposes, he wiped away anything Zimmerman may have done that was within his rights. By initiating force, he made Zimmerman's legal actions irrelevant.

If it was Zimmerman who initiated force, he blew it and he's morally responsible for Martin's death. He may still be legal, however, depending on what happened after. If he initiated force, then stopped and indicated his desire to stop the altercation, Martin was required by law to stop attacking him. If he continued and Zimmerman feared for his life, Zimmerman was justified, even if he was guilty of assault initially.

All that matters now is who stepped over the line. It doesn't matter how close Zimmerman might have gotten to it, it only matters who stepped over it.

On that most important fact, I have no opinion. How could I?

Does that make me a Zimmerman supporter?

 

[griffin]

Says who, prosecutor?

Dershowitz: The charging instrument filed against George Zimmerman is “unethical” and will never make it past a judge

Dershowitz: The charging instrument filed against George Zimmerman is “unethical” and will never make it past a judge « Hot Air

Video - Charge is irresponsible and unethical

"Nothing in affidavit suggests a crime, and a good judge will throw it out."

 

[KG1]

Dershowitz: The charging instrument filed against George Zimmerman is “unethical” and will never make it past a judge

Dershowitz: The charging instrument filed against George Zimmerman is “unethical” and will never make it past a judge « Hot Air

Video - Charge is irresponsible and unethical

"Nothing in affidavit suggests a crime, and a good judge will throw it out."

Well it looks like the judge has agreed with the affidavit and said there is probable cause to proceed.

The judge agreed there was probable cause to proceed, and set for a formal arraignment on May 29, at 1:30 p.m. ET. O'Mara said Zimmerman would plead not guilty.

George Zimmerman charged with 2nd-degree murder: Trayvon Martin shooter to remain in jail (LIVE coverage) | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

 

[griffin]

The court filing seems a little hinky.

Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin.

This contradicts the 911 call.

Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.

According to the girlfriend, Martin confronted Zimmerman.

Trayvon Martin's mother has reviewed the 911 calls and has identified the voice crying for help as Trayvon Martin's voice.

Trayvon's father reviewed them and initially said it wasn't. Nevertheless, don't we have two eyewitnesses to the struggle and crying for help? I would think eyewitnesses would be more reliable than the mom listening to the 911 tape. Why aren't they mentioned?

A fired casing that was recovered at the scene was determined to have been fired from the firearm.

Although technically correct, this is stated a little odd if in fact Mas Ayoob was correct about the casing never ejecting from the handgun.

 

[griffin]

Arrest Delivered – Trayvon’s Parents Closer To Payday, Attorney General Provides The Key | The Last Refuge

According to the article, without an arrest of Zimmerman there is no implied probable cause which could lead to compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death. They need an arrest to sue in civil court for money. They DO NOT need a conviction.

???

 

[KG1]

Well Martin's family and sharpton and whoever else said all we wanted was an arrest and we'll go from there. Looks like they got their arrest.

Arrest Delivered – Trayvon’s Parents Closer To Payday, Attorney General Provides The Key | The Last Refuge

According to the article, without an arrest of Zimmerman there is no implied probable cause which could lead to compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death. They need an arrest to sue in civil court for money. They DO NOT need a conviction.

???

Yep.

 

[strahd71]

Arrest Delivered – Trayvon’s Parents Closer To Payday, Attorney General Provides The Key | The Last Refuge

According to the article, without an arrest of Zimmerman there is no implied probable cause which could lead to compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death. They need an arrest to sue in civil court for money. They DO NOT need a conviction.

???

yep look at the OJ case, he was found not guilty and then sued by the families.

i dont know if OJ was guilty or not but i think it sucks that if you go to trial and are found not guilty that you can still be sued.... just doesnt seem fair

sorry for the digression

jake

 

[Fargo]

Arrest Delivered – Trayvon’s Parents Closer To Payday, Attorney General Provides The Key | The Last Refuge

According to the article, without an arrest of Zimmerman there is no implied probable cause which could lead to compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death. They need an arrest to sue in civil court for money. They DO NOT need a conviction.

???

Whoever wrote that article has no understanding of how that section of Florida law actually works and seems to have a serious axe to grind. The arrest is meaningless, rather it is a judicial determination of PC that matters. Whether that happens in a criminal or civil case is irrelevant.

Joe

 

[Glock19]

Trayvon had a right to be there. In the world we live in, however, an unknown black male is going to be looked at with suspicion in a lot of situations. That's the facts, I'm not defending that state of the world, just noting it.

I agree with you but again, the race is played. If an unknown person is in my neighborhood wearing a hoodie or not, white ,black ,mexican ,chinese, japanese, or even purple, I DONT CARE what color they are. If they are acting suspicious Im going to say something. Zimmerman never mentioned race until asked. I would immediatley give an accurate description becasue that is what i was trained to do , Black male in late teens wearing a hoodie and jeans, walking down whatever road, acting suspicious.
Im not trying to say race matters to you at all, but people need to get the idea that him being black was probably not an issue to anyone except in giving the description to the 911 operator.

 

[Glock19]

Whoever wrote that article has no understanding of how that section of Florida law actually works and seems to have a serious axe to grind. The arrest is meaningless, rather it is a judicial determination of PC that matters. Whether that happens in a criminal or civil case is irrelevant.

Joe

In Florida you dont need an arrest for this to go to a civil suit.

 

[dross]

I agree with you but again, the race is played. If an unknown person is in my neighborhood wearing a hoodie or not, white ,black ,mexican ,chinese, japanese, or even purple, I DONT CARE what color they are. If they are acting suspicious Im going to say something. Zimmerman never mentioned race until asked. I would immediatley give an accurate description becasue that is what i was trained to do , Black male in late teens wearing a hoodie and jeans, walking down whatever road, acting suspicious.
Im not trying to say race matters to you at all, but people need to get the idea that him being black was probably not an issue to anyone except in giving the description to the 911 operator.

I'm not saying it was an issue to Zimmerman. My point was something completely different.

People are pointing out that Martin had every right to be there.

Those same people say that Zimmerman should have known better than to follow, which is also perfectly legal.

I'm making a comparison, between two legal forms of behavior which can both in the real world lead to consequences, fair or unfair.

To put it more plainly, Zimmerman may have exercised poor judgment by following Martin, and that Martin was using poor judgment if he doesn't know that teenaged black males are looked at as thugs by some of the population.

 

[Double T]

If someone is skulking and appears to be looking at all the houses in a neighborhood with a recent history of break ins, I think any of us would be leery of them regardless off their pigmentation.

This whole situation reeks, and I really hope we get to find out what happened.

 

[hornadylnl]

I agree with you on this. I've read your reasoning about when you would help your neighbors, and I understand your reasoning, though I would do differently.

Trayvon had a right to be there. In the world we live in, however, an unknown black male is going to be looked at with suspicion in a lot of situations. That's the facts, I'm not defending that state of the world, just noting it.

Zimmerman had a right to take an active interest in his neighborhood. Apparently he had reason to be suspicious of people, if they'd really had some crime increases.

Maybe Zimmerman followed him. I won't say that's something he should have done, but he should know it had risks.

So, let's say that Trayvon had a right to walk through a neighborhood, and Martin had a right to check him out. Martin should have known that being a young black male, some people are going to look at him unfairly. Zimmerman should have known that following someone around that HE HIMSELF thought was up to no good, could result in a confrontation. He also should have known that being armed added another element to this that could complicate matters.

So far we have two people who are in a situation they both should know could get dicey, yet both have remained within the law and within their rights.

Someone stepped across a line. Someone was wrong. Someone went outside of their rights and touched someone else's body. Someone initiated force.

If it was Martin who initiated the force, for all practical purposes, he wiped away anything Zimmerman may have done that was within his rights. By initiating force, he made Zimmerman's legal actions irrelevant.

If it was Zimmerman who initiated force, he blew it and he's morally responsible for Martin's death. He may still be legal, however, depending on what happened after. If he initiated force, then stopped and indicated his desire to stop the altercation, Martin was required by law to stop attacking him. If he continued and Zimmerman feared for his life, Zimmerman was justified, even if he was guilty of assault initially.

All that matters now is who stepped over the line. It doesn't matter how close Zimmerman might have gotten to it, it only matters who stepped over it.

On that most important fact, I have no opinion. How could I?

Does that make me a Zimmerman supporter?

You know the prosecution is going to take all the comments made by neighbors and possibly anything Zimmerman has said (that we don't already know about) and paint it as a "if it's brown, it's down" neighborhood. With no physical evidence (broken car or house window, etc) to support his suspicion, the prosecution will say his suspicion was driven out of racism. Do I think it was driven by racism? Not with what information we have available. If the prosecution can convince the jury that Zimmerman was seeking people of race, he may end up convicted of something. It's Zimmerman's own damn fault for getting involved in a situation without clear cut proof that he was in the right. There's no way he can articulate he prevented or stopped a crime in progress. If the prosecution paints the picture that Zimmerman was only this aggressive with young black kids, what will the jury do?

 

[Glock19]

I'm not saying it was an issue to Zimmerman. My point was something completely different.

People are pointing out that Martin had every right to be there.

Those same people say that Zimmerman should have known better than to follow, which is also perfectly legal.

I'm making a comparison, between two legal forms of behavior which can both in the real world lead to consequences, fair or unfair.

To put it more plainly, Zimmerman may have exercised poor judgment by following Martin, and that Martin was using poor judgment if he doesn't know that teenaged black males are looked at as thugs by some of the population.

I know. Thats what I was agreeing With you on. I was just adding on...

 

[Glock19]

You know the prosecution is going to take all the comments made by neighbors and possibly anything Zimmerman has said (that we don't already know about) and paint it as a "if it's brown, it's down" neighborhood. With no physical evidence (broken car or house window, etc) to support his suspicion, the prosecution will say his suspicion was driven out of racism. Do I think it was driven by racism? Not with what information we have available. If the prosecution can convince the jury that Zimmerman was seeking people of race, he may end up convicted of something. It's Zimmerman's own damn fault for getting involved in a situation without clear cut proof that he was in the right. There's no way he can articulate he prevented or stopped a crime in progress. If the prosecution paints the picture that Zimmerman was only this aggressive with young black kids, what will the jury do?

I don't believe that at all. Zimmerman doesn't have to articulate he prevented or stopped a crime. Thats not how it works... he doesn't have to prove any of that. He saw a stranger in his neighborhood, acting suspicious, that's his whole defense. How can anyone prove any different. With all the recent break ins, he was beige a good neighbor and by his own accounts was jumped by the suspicious person.. and there isn't a witness saying different...

 

[ATOMonkey]

You know the prosecution is going to take all the comments made by neighbors and possibly anything Zimmerman has said (that we don't already know about) and paint it as a "if it's brown, it's down" neighborhood. With no physical evidence (broken car or house window, etc) to support his suspicion, the prosecution will say his suspicion was driven out of racism. Do I think it was driven by racism? Not with what information we have available. If the prosecution can convince the jury that Zimmerman was seeking people of race, he may end up convicted of something. It's Zimmerman's own damn fault for getting involved in a situation without clear cut proof that he was in the right. There's no way he can articulate he prevented or stopped a crime in progress. If the prosecution paints the picture that Zimmerman was only this aggressive with young black kids, what will the jury do?

I agree. All the prosecution needs to do is spin a semi-believable yarn about his motive. Beyond a shadow of a doubt, apparently means "if you think it may have happened."

The job of the defense will be to beat it into the jury's head that criminal trials require 100% proof that the accused commited the crime. Which is where OJ's lawyers did a FANTASTIC job. They had ACTUAL evidence in that case, and the dude walked.

Florida Murder 2 is defined as such:

The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

The defense will need to keep reminding the jury that the state has to prove Zimmerman was 1) Committing an act that was imminently dangerous and 2) that he showed a depravity with regard to human life.

Neither of which fit any of the information available to the public.

Unless the defense really drops the ball, or the jury is out for blood, I don't see how they can convict. Not of murder 2 anyway.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I don't believe that at all. Zimmerman doesn't have to articulate he prevented or stopped a crime. Thats not how it works... he doesn't have to prove any of that. He saw a stranger in his neighborhood, acting suspicious, that's his whole defense. How can anyone prove any different. With all the recent break ins, he was beige a good neighbor and by his own accounts was jumped by the suspicious person.. and there isn't a witness saying different...

Have you ever watched an actual criminal jury trial?

All they do is spin spin spin and pander to emotions. Lies heaped on top of lies in order to convince 12 people that you're more right than the other guy.

The prosecution will appeal to the jury's emotion. They will show Zimmerman as a racist, a "mall ninja", and uncaring about the victim. They will also attempt to show that if Zimmerman is aquitted that he will be a threat to the community.

They will show Martin as being a "boy" just visiting his father with no ill intentions until he was provoked by Zimmerman, who they have already painted as a monster.

They will show that Martin was committing no crime, and as such Zimmerman had no reason to follow Martin. This will advance the narrative that Zimmerman had it out for young black kids.

If they can, the prosecution will also show that Zimmerman was not consistent with how he dealt with people coming and going, and that he singled out Martin simply because he was a young black man.

They will drag him through the mud and do everything in their power to paint him as a monster.

Again though, if the defense is even half way competent, they should be able to steer the jury towards the fact that the prosecution has no actual evidence to support a murder conviction, and all of this is just a story designed to manipulate their emotions.

 

[dlbrown75]

Why is everyone distracted by this? There are much more important issues.

 

[Expat]

Why is everyone distracted by this? There are much more important issues.

Yeah, like the election stuff hasn't already been beat to death....