Travyon Martin Parents Settle Wrongful Death Claim for Over One Million Dollars

All Honor93 has to do is provide one instance of someone being prosecuted for using the same locally-accepted short-cut that Trayvon is alleged to have used, and her point about trespassing would have some merit. Even Zimmerman knew it wasn't against any laws, otherwise he'd have made it clear in the NEN call that Trayvon was trespassing, rather than just mentioning that he looked suspicious.

The thing is, we only have Z's word again that TM ever was stood in front of Taafe's house when Z first saw him. If SPD had been doing their duty, after Z told them in his deposition that he noticed TM after having to slow down because a car was backing out of a driveway, they'd have been asking Z which driveway exactly and would be questioning said vehicle owner for corroboration. As far as I'm aware, this simple follow up was never done. Also, as far as I'm aware, there's also no solid proof that Z even parked his vehicle where he said he did to go look for TM.

Originally posted by Honor93

which was refuted by the obvious ... lighted, paved, well marked, pathways that TM chose NOT to use.

So you say. With no evidence.

he was observed slinking around private property and the observer called the police to report him.

So you say. With no evidence.

you refuse to accept the established facts for some fantasy that you've created in your own mind.

It's the reverse. These facts are not established, as shown by your inability to provide evidence for them.

i've made NO accusations, that's you MO, not mine.

This is a lie, as shown above. You have consistently accused Martin of "slinking around private property" and "trespass".

You even do it in this exact post that I'm answering. Do you honestly not understand what an accusation is?

amazingly, neither you or Ivan have provided one ounce of proof, so why are either of you demanding anyone else provide it ?

you first

But my summation of events is that we don't know! I'm saying there is no proof available, so it's wrong to accuse Martin of anything.

You are saying that you know that Martin was guilty of a crime - two crimes actually - but you refuse to say how you know. You are the one making a claim, a claim that supports Zimmerman and makes Martin look bad. It's not unreasonable for you to provide some proof of this. But you can't.

I could say that Zimmerman racially abused Martin before shooting him, and then spat on him and laughed. I have as much proof for that as you do of Martin's trespass. Apparently then it would be up to you to disprove it. Which is ridiculous.

Originally posted by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas
Since I was not there for the incident, and therefore must rely of the "he said/she said" stuff, the 911 call, and Zimmerman's police report. I have no clue if he was innocent or guilty, but I have to say if my son was killed there is no way in hell I'd ever settle, as all in the money in the world wouldn't fill the emptyness in my heart. It wouldn't bring my son back. Sure I could buy whatever I want and travel and try to forget, but it wouldn't work. I'd probably end up drinking away that million dollars in hopes that I could numb the pain.

Do Trayvon's parents not deserve the same presumption of innocence that Zimmerman is entitled to, especially considering they haven't actually been charged with any crime?

reply to post by IvanAstikov

no, all i have to do is ignore you and your nonsense.
have a nice day

reply to post by JuniorDisco

With no evidence

that has been provided repeatedly in PROPER threads.
you wanna re-hash it again, i'll meet you on one of the hundreds in existance, pick one.
i have said my piece as it relates to this thread.

if you have a problem with the fact that Tray's parents have done more to damage his 'reputation' than anyone could ever do from this point forward, discuss it.

otherwise, a fist full of Cash over the truth reveals the most important fact anyone needs to know.
and since the boy's own parents weren't convinced of his innocence, why should anyone else be

reply to post by IvanAstikov

no, they chose to be financially compensated rather seek and reveal the truth.

they made their choice and TM made his.
why can't you accept that ?

reply to post by IvanAstikov



Im not sure exactly what you're getting at here, but I was speaking more on the money, and on situations in general. It just so happened to be posted in this thread. I was simply stating that no ammount of money in the world would make the situation they're going through go away, nor will it numb it. I wasn't trying to comment on the case, just the money situation in a general matter.

:-) Have a nice day

reply to post by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas


My apologies, if you wasn't having a subtle dig at the motivations of TM's parents. It just seemed that you were negating the possibility that justice for their son was more important than $$$.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas

 

My apologies, if you wasn't having a subtle dig at the motivations of TM's parents. It just seemed that you were negating the possibility that justice for their son was more important than $$$.

I was simply putting myself in their situation, then speaking from that position. However, when it comes down to it, it would seem his family isn't missing any oportunity to profit from this tragedy. If my memory serves me correctly, weren't they selling Trayvon Tshirts and such?

I am not saying Zimmerman is guilty, nor am I saying he's innocent. I haven't had the oportunity to review the case in detail, and even still it would seem we can only speculate what happened without video proof or eye witnesses.

Regardless, a young man lost his life and that is a shame. Again, have a nice day

reply to post by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas


While you was "in their situation," did it occur to you that this was only the first step in defending the slurs against your son's memory and making sure that full accountability for his untimely death was far from over?

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas

 

While you was "in their situation," did it occur to you that this was only the first step in defending the slurs against your son's memory and making sure that full accountability for his untimely death was far from over?

Care to ellaborate? How does collecting a $1,000,000 settlement or selling tshirts "defend the slurs against" their son's memory? Again, I am not taking sides, Zimmerman was wrong to ask for money to help with legal fees, while pocketing the rest. I know that I would not settle out of court in the death of my child.

Now, i am on a mobile phone, so could you tell me if their settling outside of court in this case will prevent them from taking this to trail? I mean, is Zimmerman off the hook? Sorry, I'd look myself, but again Im on a mobile device. Thanks for your time.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by JuniorDisco

 

With no evidence

that has been provided repeatedly in PROPER threads.
you wanna re-hash it again, i'll meet you on one of the hundreds in existance, pick one.
i have said my piece as it relates to this thread.

if you have a problem with the fact that Tray's parents have done more to damage his 'reputation' than anyone could ever do from this point forward, discuss it.

otherwise, a fist full of Cash over the truth reveals the most important fact anyone needs to know.
and since the boy's own parents weren't convinced of his innocence, why should anyone else be

So the evidence exists but it's somewhere else. Riiiight.

You should try this thing they have on the internet called a link. Unless of course the evidence doesn't actually exist. And you've been making it up and along the way smearing the reputation of a defenceless dead teenager.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

no, they chose to be financially compensated rather seek and reveal the truth.

No they didn't. The case can still be pursued in both civil and criminal realms against Zimmerman.

they made their choice and TM made his.

You have no idea what choices he made. Hardly anybody does at this stage. The fact that you've made your mind up speaks volumes.

Originally posted by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas

Care to ellaborate? How does collecting a $1,000,000 settlement or selling tshirts "defend the slurs against" their son's memory? Again, I am not taking sides, Zimmerman was wrong to ask for money to help with legal fees, while pocketing the rest. I know that I would not settle out of court in the death of my child.

I'm guessing any money they've took will mostly go towards furthering their quest for full accountability for their son's death. If that results in further settlements or compensatory payments, I'm guessing they'll establish some sort of lasting memorial to their son's tragic death. If their future actions prove my trust to have been misplaced, I'll just accept I was wrong on this one.

Originally posted by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas
Now, i am on a mobile phone, so could you tell me if their settling outside of court in this case will prevent them from taking this to trail? I mean, is Zimmerman off the hook? Sorry, I'd look myself, but again Im on a mobile device. Thanks for your time.

Nope, Z isn't off the hook. All it seems TM's parents have done is accept that the HOA didn't force Zimmerman to take on his role of neighbourhood good guy, and settled for a payment for them just not doing enough to discourage him, when they should have known he had "issues," like a tendency to jump to conclusions, and was on medication for his "memory problems"(probably why he forgot he was carrying his gun on the night, until Trayvon helpfully reminded him he had it).

Originally posted by BulletsCantSilenceIdeas

Care to ellaborate? How does collecting a $1,000,000 settlement or selling tshirts "defend the slurs against" their son's memory? Again, I am not taking sides, Zimmerman was wrong to ask for money to help with legal fees, while pocketing the rest. I know that I would not settle out of court in the death of my child.

If I may step in, I think the "selling t shirts" meme is another example of people trying to dish the dirt on Martin's parents. It's true they have copyrighted his name, but this could be a defensive move to prevent others from profiting from his death - and indeed there is ample evidence that there were opportunists doing just that.

But it suits a certain sort of person - of which there are notable examples in this thread - to suggest that every motive both Martin and his parents have is craven and cynical. Mainly, I suspect, because it goes some way towards exonerating Zimmerman.

Originally posted by TinkerHaus

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I am simply going to say this.... If my son were shot and killed and I believed it to be in bad faith or a bad shoot? I wouldn't settle for a billion. No number would be enough to stop me from having my day in the light of open court. That day would be the last voice my son, in that circumstance, would ever have in this world to have a voice raised for him. It would never come again.

We all have different priorities. ...and there I leave it, without getting into the patently objectionable for my deeper feelings on the story.

This is a settlement for negligence on behalf of the HOA. This does not absolve Zimmerman from any wrong doing nor does it prevent the parents for having their day in court.

Zimmerman waived the option for dismissal and will face criminal charges.

Zimmermans only crime is that he dared to defend himself from a violent black thug. The one thing I wonder is, since the animal was put down, did the cases of home burglary in the gated community stop?

reply to post by korathin


Not sure where to start with that. Presumably Hitler's only crime was defending Germany against a bunch of usurious semites.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by korathin

 

Not sure where to start with that. Presumably Hitler's only crime was defending Germany against a bunch of usurious semites.

Look up "reductio ad Hitlerum" on Wikipedia. That's a well known and well understood form of demagoguery.

I'm actually disgusted a little bit by this kind of an "argument".

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by korathin

 

Not sure where to start with that. Presumably Hitler's only crime was defending Germany against a bunch of usurious semites.

Look up "reductio ad Hitlerum" on Wikipedia. That's a well known and well understood form of demagoguery.

I'm actually disgusted a little bit by this kind of an "argument".

Whereas calling an unarmed, dead teenager an "animal", and insinuating with no evidence at all that he was responsible for burglaries, is absolutely fine.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by korathin

 

Not sure where to start with that. Presumably Hitler's only crime was defending Germany against a bunch of usurious semites.

Look up "reductio ad Hitlerum" on Wikipedia. That's a well known and well understood form of demagoguery.

I'm actually disgusted a little bit by this kind of an "argument".

Whereas calling an unarmed, dead teenager an "animal", and insinuating with no evidence at all that he was responsible for burglaries, is absolutely fine.

I have no faith in your reading skills, and your writing was shot already with that Hitler related demagoguery. Content-free stuff.