Bloody new photo of Trayvon Martin's killer

reply to post by boncho


That study has been proven wrong multiple times. It is dated and did not have a large sample pool with differing ages.

Black men do NOT have higher levels of testosterone.

Context: Higher testosterone in black compared with white men has been postulated to explain their higher prostate cancer incidence. Previous studies comparing hormone levels by race might have been limited by size, restricted age variation, or lack of representation of the general population.

Conclusions: Contrary to the postulated racial difference, testosterone concentrations did not differ notably between black and white men.

Conclusions: Because there are no racial/ethnic differences in testosterone levels, normative ranges need not be adjusted by race/ethnicity for androgen deficiency diagnosis for men aged 30–79 yr. Further investigation is needed to determine whether differences in DHT levels and DHT to testosterone ratio can help explain racial/ethnic variations in prostate cancer incidence, body composition, and bone mass.

jcem.endojournals.org...
jcem.endojournals.org...

reply to post by litterbaux

Zimmerman had every reason to question any foreign entity within the residential neighborhood to provide; Identification. Proof of address. If neither of those were provided, reason for being present.

Foreign entity? Um...Trayvon lived in the area, he was walking home from the store.

And Trayvon has every right to walk around a neighborhood if he wants to without being harassed. This is a free country, no one owns the sidewalks or streets. Zimmerman has absolutely no authority to ask anyone for their ID or why they are walking around. Neighborhood watch means NOTHING. It gives you no legal power. The keyword is watch....

If Zimmerman was a cold blooded killer what was his motive by calling 911? If lets say, he was a racist killer. There is no motive in phoning the police and telling them your every move. It makes no sense.

Uh well he has a past of anger issues, and was clearly suffering from paranoia. All it takes a verbal altercation to cause someone to swing. Then Zimmerman couldn't handle a fight like a man and had to pull out his gun like a pussy.

If he never would have stalked Trayvon and approached him, an innocent kid walking home from the store wouldn't be dead.

Originally posted by litterbaux
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

I don't walk around in neighborhoods with a hoodie. Even if I did, if someone came up on me asking me for ID I would give it to them.

Problem solved. Easy, no violence.

The person that asked me wouldn't end up with a broken nose and head injuries.

edit on 4-12-2012 by litterbaux because: and I wouldn't end up dead

All well and good i supp- oh, that's right; Zimmerman never asked Martin for his ID that we know of. There was a confrontation and what happened after Zimmerman got out of his car is only known by Zimmerman and Martin and one of those two people can't tell you their side of the story.

reply to post by litterbaux


Well aren`t you a good and obedient soldier..

Here I hear all about how the government this and that is in our business and it is wrong...yet it is OK when a civilian does it.

No one has the right to stop you when you are going about your business to ask for ID`s. It is your business and no one else`s, maybe they have the right if you are acting suspicious but I doubt it. Martin was going about his and was not sneaking around looking like some sort of criminal. If being black and wearing a hoody makes you suspicious then watch out world...black kids love hoodies..oh wait so do whites kids.so beware...Idiot...

reply to post by kerazeesicko

This could happen to any kid out there...any black kid out there...if this is allowed..then it is open season to anyone who may be perceived as suspicious. You, family members and the general public...any paranoid idiot could kill you and claim self defense,

It already happened again in Florida. And the creepy shooter is using the stand your ground defense ....

Jordan Russell Davis: Unarmed Black Teen Shot Dead

Once again, the state of Florida will became the center of a media firestorm in the coming days thanks to another shooting of an unarmed black 17 year old by a white man who felt "threatened." On Friday night at a Jacksonville gas station, Michael Dunn, 45, gunned down Jordan Davis, 17. According to reports, Dunn, who is white, was waiting in his car while his wife was inside the station, asked — or told — a car occupied by youths parked next to his to turn the volume down of their stereo. Allegedly, an argument ensued, which ended up with Dunn, firing at least eight shots, Davis dying, according to authorities.

Dunn insists that he believed one of his interlocutors had a gun, and that he acted in self-defense. However, no firearms were found in the vehicle. His attorney, Robin Lemonidis, has been quick to dismiss comparisons to the shooting of 17 year old Travyon Martin by 28 year old George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida in February. Zimmerman has been charged with second degree murder, and his trial is scheduled to commence in June. The defense's strategy will likely rely heavily upon Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law, which allows an individual to use deadly force when one perceives a threat to one's personal safety."*

Why haven`t the parents been charged with child neglect?

The dead "child" did not live in that neighborhood, the dead "childs" father did not live in that neighborhood, the only person who legally lived in that gated neighborhood was the fathers girlfriend.
The father took this "child" to his girlfriends house and then left him their alone and unsupervised, so why hasn`t the father been charged with child neglect?
Leaving the "child" alone and unsupervised in an unfamilar gated community contributed to the "childs" death.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by litterbaux

 

Well aren`t you a good and obedient soldier..

Here I hear all about how the government this and that is in our business and it is wrong...yet it is OK when a civilian does it.

No one has the right to stop you when you are going about your business to ask for ID`s. It is your business and no one else`s, maybe they have the right if you are acting suspicious but I doubt it. Martin was going about his and was not sneaking around looking like some sort of criminal. If being black and wearing a hoody makes you suspicious then watch out world...black kids love hoodies..oh wait so do whites kids.so beware...Idiot...

edit on 4-12-2012 by kerazeesicko because: I CAN

you need to remember that this was a private community, it was private property, it wasn`t a public street. also martin did not live in that community he was just a visitor on private property..
when you are on someone else`s private property then that person has the right to ask you anything they want to ask you. They have the right to be suspicious of you, they have the right to shoot you if they feel threatened by you.

reply to post by Trustfund


Dont give me that..still in high school, 17 years old crap.

I know kids younger than that , that would end your life RIGHT now..without a blink of an eye.

SHutup.

You dont live in the real world.

Dont talk about things you know NOTHING about. Fool.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
All you racist idiots defending an obvious racist..idiots!

He had no reason to be following Martin..none. A black kid with a hoody is not suspicious. Only to a racist.

He followed Martin and then killed him...after Martin got suspicious and like most males confronted his follower.

Most likely asking him why he was following him and then Zimmerman must have said something or refused to answer therefore escalating the situation more...resulting in this coward pulling out his weapon killing this kid.

I like the first statement of ignorance. Do you know how many times I have been questioned by a BLACK man walking down the street at night as a white man? On the wrong turf and in my own quiet neighborhood. I have been followed and almost killed by a BLACK MAN because I was minding my own business. Did I EVER ONCE attack any of them? NOPE. Not ONCE, but it is common for a male to "confront" their follower. I told every one of them to mind their own business and where I was going because they we're threatening a government/state official. Everyone defending Trayvon has nothing to go on besides defending the life of an individual. Race has nothing to do with it, but instead the black community screams racist and these individuals are the ones who still complain about slavery.

Here's how it really went down.
Zimmerman, an attention whore, gotta be a hero guy...decided to find those responsible for all the break-ins in that neighborhood. Finds Trayvon walking around not looking like he belongs with his hoody up on a 63 degree rainy night. Hoodies do not keep anyone from getting wet in the rain, but maybe it was his only jacket. To the defense and the jury, it looks like he is trying to put on a show. It almost feels just by the way he presented himself walking down the street, that he was looking for trouble. Presentation is all that matters in this day and age. Why? Because my manager got accused of being racist for his tattoos by an Asian woman.

So, lets recap here. This is what the jury would see. Zimmerman, the savior of the planet, gonna clean up crime batman style. Then there is Trayvon, a 17 year old immature kid trying to live up to the stereo typical view of the black community. With all that being pointed out, there is a motive by both sides. Zimmerman being batman and Trayvon not taking any authority from anyone.

Now the scene of the attack. Zimmerman does the right thing by calling the dispatcher, but does the right/wrong thing by following. Since there was reports of break-ins all over the neighborhood, it is the right thing to follow because it probably would have taken the cops 20 minutes or so to get there. It was wrong because it encourages confrontation. Since Trayvon was putting on a show and trying assert his dominance, he decided it would be in good nature to go after Zimmerman. The reason why I say he went after him was because of the very fact that Trayvon had no bruises or cuts on him besides the entry point of the bullet. This was released by the defense. Zimmerman on the other hand, looked like he got in a fight. Can't ever question the witnesses, story is going to be different every time. So, investigators take the common denominators of the story and put together their own. Zimmerman then proceed to shoot Trayvon.

What could have been done to avoid this? Same as my situations, tell them where you are going, mind your own business and have a nice day. Then again presentation. Not saying all hoodies mean that person is up to no good, but that is how society views them. I mean crap...if it was raining that bad that you have to put up your hood, then maybe he should have never walked to the gas station. I have lived in Florida, it doesn't rain in spurts. If the follower doesn't stop following you, CALL THE COPS! Holy CRAP! Physical confrontation should never be the answer. On top of that, has anyone asked themselves to why Zimmerman would attack someone twice the size of him? None of you screaming Trayvon innocent would attack anyone bigger than yourselves. DONT LIE EITHER! Either way of the outcome, the tables would have been turned if Zimmerman died. And, either way, Zimmerman is not gonna be convicted. In a criminal court of law, there needs to be 97% infallible evidence. And, just like the OJ case, that couldn't be produced. Personally, this won't make it in a civil court either. Trayvon had a problem with authority and is the decided factor in this case. Maybe without an attitude, this would have never happened. If Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, that is illegal. Nothing Zimmerman did was illegal. He had every right to follow this kid, but Trayvon had no right to attack anyone. Not unless his life was in danger. I know all of you will scream his life was, but come on really? If Zimmerman attacked first, he could have tried running away. Trayvon instead confront him. ERRRRR...WRONG

I have a degree in criminal justice.

Originally posted by Trustfund
reply to post by boncho

 

That study has been proven wrong multiple times. It is dated and did not have a large sample pool with differing ages.

Black men do NOT have higher levels of testosterone.

Context: Higher testosterone in black compared with white men has been postulated to explain their higher prostate cancer incidence. Previous studies comparing hormone levels by race might have been limited by size, restricted age variation, or lack of representation of the general population.

Conclusions: Contrary to the postulated racial difference, testosterone concentrations did not differ notably between black and white men.

Conclusions: Because there are no racial/ethnic differences in testosterone levels, normative ranges need not be adjusted by race/ethnicity for androgen deficiency diagnosis for men aged 30–79 yr. Further investigation is needed to determine whether differences in DHT levels and DHT to testosterone ratio can help explain racial/ethnic variations in prostate cancer incidence, body composition, and bone mass.

jcem.endojournals.org...
jcem.endojournals.org...

edit on 4-12-2012 by Trustfund because: (no reason given)

Getting away from the OP a bit, but the link between testosterone and prostate cancer is factually innacurate and premised on very old, and very bad science. Recent research conducted by a Harvard Dr. has found testosterone is a preventative factor for many prostate problems, as well as prostate cancer. It is actually LOW testosterone that puts you at risk. So linking prostate cancer and high testosterone is foolish. Higher rates of prostate problems is indicative of low testosterone if anything. Carry on.

ETA: I have thought from day 1 that Zimmerman was innocent and Trayvon acted like a punk and was tragically killed. No murder. I was dating a super hot girl who was a dancer (no not that type of dancer) with an incredible body and broke up with her over the whole thing. Her family knew the Trayvon family and it was a big mess.

Lesson. Don't assault a man with a gun, it might end badly.

Originally posted by Trustfund
reply to post by litterbaux

 

Zimmerman had every reason to question any foreign entity within the residential neighborhood to provide; Identification. Proof of address. If neither of those were provided, reason for being present.

Foreign entity? Um...Trayvon lived in the area, he was walking home from the store.

And Trayvon has every right to walk around a neighborhood if he wants to without being harassed. This is a free country, no one owns the sidewalks or streets. Zimmerman has absolutely no authority to ask anyone for their ID or why they are walking around. Neighborhood watch means NOTHING. It gives you no legal power. The keyword is watch....

If Zimmerman was a cold blooded killer what was his motive by calling 911? If lets say, he was a racist killer. There is no motive in phoning the police and telling them your every move. It makes no sense.

Uh well he has a past of anger issues, and was clearly suffering from paranoia. All it takes a verbal altercation to cause someone to swing. Then Zimmerman couldn't handle a fight like a man and had to pull out his gun like a pussy.

If he never would have stalked Trayvon and approached him, an innocent kid walking home from the store wouldn't be dead.

Wow...defending the BLACK man extremely well. Wasn't it you saying that it was a racist killing? Zimmerman pulled a gun out cause he was a "wussy?" He was getting beat up. I would pull a gun out as well. And, no! You have no idea about this case. Zimmerman was a failed criminal justice wannabe. He couldn't make it to the police academy. So, he did the next thing he could and that was become a wannabe batman.

No he doesn't have an authority to ask for ID, but does have a every right to, especially with the break-ins. Authority and right are two different things. He has every right to figure out what Trayvon was doing, but Trayvon had no right to allegedly attack him. Trayvon had no bruises or cuts on him, while Zimmerman clearly got his butt handed to him. There is no case for Trayvon, even if he was alive. Without any signs you we're physically harmed, you we're not in danger. And, in this case it was pretty blatant. You can complain and cry all you want, but Trayvon was ultimately in the wrong. Zimmerman was still wrong as well, but this case is why I dont confront morons...never know if they have a gun or not. Which most people do now a days.

Originally posted by Trustfund
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

This could happen to any kid out there...any black kid out there...if this is allowed..then it is open season to anyone who may be perceived as suspicious. You, family members and the general public...any paranoid idiot could kill you and claim self defense,

It already happened again in Florida. And the creepy shooter is using the stand your ground defense ....

Jordan Russell Davis: Unarmed Black Teen Shot Dead

Once again, the state of Florida will became the center of a media firestorm in the coming days thanks to another shooting of an unarmed black 17 year old by a white man who felt "threatened." On Friday night at a Jacksonville gas station, Michael Dunn, 45, gunned down Jordan Davis, 17. According to reports, Dunn, who is white, was waiting in his car while his wife was inside the station, asked — or told — a car occupied by youths parked next to his to turn the volume down of their stereo. Allegedly, an argument ensued, which ended up with Dunn, firing at least eight shots, Davis dying, according to authorities.

Dunn insists that he believed one of his interlocutors had a gun, and that he acted in self-defense. However, no firearms were found in the vehicle. His attorney, Robin Lemonidis, has been quick to dismiss comparisons to the shooting of 17 year old Travyon Martin by 28 year old George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida in February. Zimmerman has been charged with second degree murder, and his trial is scheduled to commence in June. The defense's strategy will likely rely heavily upon Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law, which allows an individual to use deadly force when one perceives a threat to one's personal safety."*

This is far from the Trayvon-Zimmerman case. Dunn blatantly attacked these individuals because he is an obviously angered man. And, this goes to the original post on the first page. You are media controlled. This case is being compared to the Trayvon-Zimmerman situation by the media and you listened. I personally think you are just trying to justify Trayvon's death as being a racist killing.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by litterbaux

 

Well aren`t you a good and obedient soldier..

Here I hear all about how the government this and that is in our business and it is wrong...yet it is OK when a civilian does it.

No one has the right to stop you when you are going about your business to ask for ID`s. It is your business and no one else`s, maybe they have the right if you are acting suspicious but I doubt it. Martin was going about his and was not sneaking around looking like some sort of criminal. If being black and wearing a hoody makes you suspicious then watch out world...black kids love hoodies..oh wait so do whites kids.so beware...Idiot...

edit on 4-12-2012 by kerazeesicko because: I CAN

Actually, I have every right to ask you what you are doing and ask for ID. Do I have the authority...NO! An ID has personal information on it and isn't pertinent to asking anyone what are they doing. Wearing a hoody has been labeled as having criminal intent by today's society. That is what happens when enough people commit crimes in hoodies. Same crap happens if I wear a hoody. People think I am trying to steal crap in a store. Being black has nothing to do with it except fulfilling the stereo type of wearing a hoody. Not that hard to figure out. This is not a racist killing and never will be because in society's eyes they are both minorities

reply to post by Trustfund


Your assertion of age is subjective in this instance. Zimmerman had no clue of the age of the person in question. I ask you this, are you a good judge of age based on low light conditions, clothing, demeanor, etc? How many times has someone said so and so is X but they are truly Y? I am not defending or condemning here, it is a basic understanding that I am addressing.

You are posting post facto of the situation. You know Treyvon's age because it was reported, but Zimmerman had no clue. So in the purest sense, age at this point is moot to the case at hand, especially someone at 17. There are many 17 year old children that can pass easily pass for early 20s.

POST SCRIPT:
If age were even brought up in court, the defense (in this case, Zimmerman's lawyers) can easily defeat it by parading a 20-something year old looking man in similar attire who is actually 17). That is why age is moot.

And Trayvon has every right to walk around a neighborhood if he wants to without being harassed. This is a free country, no one owns the sidewalks or streets.

I agree with this completely, thinking that wearing a hoodie and walking around a neighborhood warrants someone being shot is completely ridiculous. Sometimes I wonder about how totalitarian the people in America are becoming.

Zimmerman is going to prison for at least 10 years for killing an unarmed kid.

When Mr. beady-eyed racist gets to the joint he's going to check into PC, because the punk won't be able to bring a gun to prison and he's going to get shanked for killing a kid - just like any kid rapist or kid killer deserves.

Don't want to do time, don't do the crime - punks.

So, when a when a high school girl gets raped she's a kid and the suspect is labeled a pedophile, but when it's a black high school aged boy that gets shot in a fist fight he's suddenly referred to as a man that scared to gunman enough to slaughter him in cold blood.

reply to post by darkbake


Quite true, but such line of thinking would have to include the second party, that being Zimmerman, would also enjoy that same ability and right. Maybe his choices were not optimal, but neither were that of Martin. Bad decisions it seems, when evidence is examined, abound.

If you have every right to walk down the street, so do I.

Originally posted by Domo1
For all the people that are going to descend on this thread and say Zimmerman acted as the aggressor, following someone is not illegal, neither is asking them what they're doing. Neither of those things warrants physical assault, and it's clear Zimmerman suffered that. The only real question is if he feared for his life, and only he can answer that, and he has. Start banging my head against the ground and I'm going to shoot you too.

Zimmerman made some poor choices, but none of them were illegal.

He should not have followed him. Period. He assumed the role of a police officer. Zimmerman was looking for trouble. He was big man with his big gun and he wanted to shoot someone, anyone to puff himself up. If Zimmerman fears for his life, he shouldn't be out roaming the street with a gun, looking for trouble.

I don't know what the laws are in other parts of the country, but up here, you cannot just follow or pursue someone with intent to subdue them or harass them. It's considered harassment. My ex knows about that, since he went to jail for it.

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
Zimmerman is going to prison for at least 10 years for killing an unarmed kid.

Same question posed to you: Are you impeccable in discerning the age of individuals? Age is irrelevant to the case because age, especially at 17, can be indeterminable.

When Mr. beady-eyes gets to the joint he's going to check into PC, because the beady eyed punk wont be able to bring a gun to prison he's going to get shanked for killing a kid - just like any kid rapist or kid killer deserves.

I will give you this, you are unabashed by your obviously over subjective view point of the case.

So, when a when a high school girl gets raped she's a kid and the suspect is labeled a pedophile, but when it's a black high school aged boy that gets shot in a fist fight he;s suddenly referred to as a man that scared to gunman enough to slaughter him in cold blood like the racist pig he is.

Hyperbole! Good lord.....It has nothing to do with black, white, brown or blue. You are connecting two different aspects and even at that are completely off the charts. How was he racist, please do tell. Bad decision maker, but racist?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04


ETA: I have thought from day 1 that Zimmerman was innocent and Trayvon acted like a punk and was tragically killed. No murder. I was dating a super hot girl who was a dancer (no not that type of dancer) with an incredible body and broke up with her over the whole thing. Her family knew the Trayvon family and it was a big mess.

Lesson. Don't assault a man with a gun, it might end badly.

edit on 4-12-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)

IMO Zimmerman was the punk. Running around with a gun looking for trouble. I seriously detest some of the people who latch on to the whole "neighborhood watch" thing. They usually are looking for trouble, so it gives them an excuse to get their guns out and play police officer.