Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

Originally posted by projectvxn

The trial established Martin as the initiator of the physical altercation.

No, you are wrong it didn't.

Let's say you were right. why didn't the defense let Zimmerman go on the stand?

NO one knows how the fight started, what words were said and why Zimmerman didn't let Martin he was carrying a weapon before he killed him.

reply to post by Astrocyte


I read your post and I have to admit, it doesn't make much sense to me. You take a side trip off into a T&C banned topic which I'll leave alone entirely here ..but spend 1/3rd or so of your post on it. That issue had nothing at all to factor into that night between Martin and Zimmerman. You spend the rest, it seems, hitting on the plight and downtrodden status of the Black man.

In fact, you used the term Black 17 times (I counted.. twice... it struck me as so repetitive by the middle of the post). Perhaps if Zimmerman was some white man with a known and documented racist history to his conduct, I could see the connection. However, ethnically, Zimmerman is Hispanic, not White and I don't recall hearing anything racist from him. The one comment on the 911 that was race related was an answer to a question drawn out by dispatch.

So, frankly, I'm a bit baffled as to where your points fit into this particular case? I don't dispute they are good points in other context ...but miss this context entirely?

Originally posted by LiveEquation
I don't normally respond to threads like these but like the mods said this topic is sensitive as it has some racial connotations, so care should be taken.

I don't think there was any racial 'discrimination' involved since racial profiling is not the same as contempt for other races.

I would say Martin was racial profiled which is ok since it is the same in a way as driving a red car or orange car. Statistically these are involved in accidents than any other and have more speed tickets as well, that is why insurance for vehicles with these colors is higher than others.

However, Zimmerman ignored law officials and followed his instinct and stalked the young man. Why did Zimmerman at some point leave his car and pursue Martin on foot? I dont know, that is beyond me.

But what is beyond me is that he shot him in the heart of all places. Couldn't he shoot him in the stomach or leg? or rather hold the gun and say "Freeze, punk i have a gun, get off me".

The fact that he shot him without first letting Martin know what kind of danger he was facing is what makes me horrified by the verdict. There is a reason why cops carry guns ( it is to make one think twice about resisting arrest, at least they let you know before they shoot you)

I have been involved in many fights but never have i went for my gun and shot anyone as a last resort. I pull it out to end fights, just to let know people that stakes are high and i don't want to fight.

Human life is too precious no matter how i feel about my enemy.

On this reasoning, I think Zimmerman shot Martin in cold blood. Zimmerman didn't want to incapacitate Martin long enough for the cops to arrive. He killed him!

I judge him based on my experience, not on race or some florida based laws.

How many people have gone to prison for lesser crimes? and yet Zimmerman gets to walk?

That jury should be tried. period!

edit on 14-7-2013 by LiveEquation because: (no reason given)

No.

The movies aren't real. In Hollywood that may work. Not in real life.

In real life you have a split second to act and defend yourself. When your adrenaline pumping and also clouding your thoughts, you are not going to be able to decide where to aim the gun. Also evidence suggests Martin was grabbing the gun. If he didn't do that, he may not have been shot in the heart.

reply to post by ProfessorChaos


is it even in question about who started the confrontation?

has anyone claimed that it was an armed martin who approached an unarmed zimmerman unprovoked?

i genuinely don't see how anyone can claim martin was the one who instigated the trouble.

he was walking to his dads house, completely minding his own business when an armed man approached him.

as soon as zimmerman does that, he's started he trouble.

reply to post by bruteforce13


I'd be happy to correct you:

Source

The Orlando Sentinel reported that George Zimmerman told police he lost 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in the neighborhood he regularly patrolled and was walking back to his vehicle last month when the youth approached him from behind.

The two exchanged words, Zimmerman said, and Martin then punched him, jumped on top of him and began banging his head on a sidewalk. Zimmerman said he began crying for help; Martin's family thinks it was their son who was crying out. Witness accounts differ and 911 tapes in which the voices are heard are not clear.

A statement from Sanford police said the newspaper story was "consistent" with evidence turned over to prosecutors.

How many breakins in that community since the night of the shooting? Zero. Pics of TM with drugs, jewelry, suspended from HS because of weed residue found in his back pack. Yea he was the innocent little boy the media and the black community made him out to be....If you beleive that, I have some nice flying pigs for sale at a real nice price.

Agree with Wrabbitt it's all about the Benjamins for the so called leaders of the black community..It's 2013 for crying out loud and racism is alive and kicking all over the planet....not just America. It's everywhere a person could be.Because we take it with us everywhere we go. One day maybe we stop seperating ourselves the way we do. Then maybe we dont. It is what it is and until we change it.... we have to live in it.

One thing I do advocate and that is these televised trials need to come to a very quick end. As in this needs to be the last one.Let the system do the ajudacation not the public. Stop televised trials.

reply to post by LiveEquation


See above post.

The facts are the facts.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by bruteforce13

 

I'd be happy to correct you:

Source

The Orlando Sentinel reported that George Zimmerman told police he lost 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in the neighborhood he regularly patrolled and was walking back to his vehicle last month when the youth approached him from behind.

The two exchanged words, Zimmerman said, and Martin then punched him, jumped on top of him and began banging his head on a sidewalk. Zimmerman said he began crying for help; Martin's family thinks it was their son who was crying out. Witness accounts differ and 911 tapes in which the voices are heard are not clear.

A statement from Sanford police said the newspaper story was "consistent" with evidence turned over to prosecutors.

Of Course im sure if ZImmerman swung first and missed he would have said so to the cops. How silly of me.

Originally posted by TKDRL
Wow, people threatened his family? Seriously?

Yes, people are that thick - they've even been to known to attack surgical clinics because the door had the word Paedia-trician written on the front - thinking it was some kind of child attacker.

All this anger and bitterness by many in this country is typical of the inner hatred and fear of black people that exists in this country.

People think: all blacks are potential criminals, and particularly young ones with hoodies. Indeed therefore it is justified in shooting down a young INNOCENT black boy who may be committing a crime.

All this based on the statistics of crime in urban America.

Urban America was and is created and maintained by the AMERICAN CULTURE and history of slavery and the oppression of black people over 5 centuries.
IT IS AN AMERICAN PHENOMENON! Created and fostered by the racist culture of America.

Black people are not more prone to crime than any other race. It’s just that if you treat a people as black people have been treated by the American experience over 5 centuries then you will produce areas of a broken cultural milieu such as exist in some of urban America: Chicago, Harlem, Detroit, Newark etc…

Look at the condition of the Native Americans. Is that because they are inferior?
Of course not. It’s because of their oppression and genocide experience in America that has weighed down on them over the years.

reply to post by bruteforce13


That's supposition and speculation at best.

Wouldn't hold up in court. Because it's a poor argument and not supported by the physical evidence.

Originally posted by roadgravel
CNN won't give up. They are doing what they can to keep this bias alive. Wonder if they will lead the NAACP's civil violation hoopla.

CNN wants riots, and by gawd they're gonna have them, by hook or by crook. I imagine that the Graphic arts guys are chained to their desks right now photo shopping Tahrir Square to look like Sanford Florida.

reply to post by WP4YT


Wow! i guess you never been on tour. You don't just shoot and kill people.

firepower and bullets are meant to end disputes and not to take life.

Like i said in my experience, i have pulled out a concealed weapon to let my enemies know i didn't want to fight but to go home. Even when they had knives, they knew what was a stake.

Its common sense that you dont shoot first and ask questions later.

Go on tour and then you will understand what I mean

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
One thing I do advocate and that is these televised trials need to come to a very quick end. As in this needs to be the last one.Let the system do the ajudacation not the public. Stop televised trials.

But...but....but, how would people know who the guilty party is months before the verdict? That's just be unfair and mean!

You can't expect people to read anymore, do you? That's inhumane.

Originally posted by bates
reply to post by ProfessorChaos

 

is it even in question about who started the confrontation?

has anyone claimed that it was an armed martin who approached an unarmed zimmerman unprovoked?

No.. No one has claimed it. In fact, evidence at trial shows Martin approached Zimmerman after having totally broken contact and returning to a confrontation by his own free choice. He didn't have to seek out Zimmerman after losing sight and contact ..but he did and he told others he was about to, which is how we know this beyond question.

i genuinely don't see how anyone can claim martin was the one who instigated the trouble.

He told his girl on the phone he was going back to that 'creepy cracker', to paraphrase. That's called taking the initiative and he took it for all it was worth. Obviously he didn't KNOW Zimmerman was armed ...and that's his problem. He shouldn't have gone out to assault a man to start with. Followed by him or not.

he was walking to his dads house, completely minding his own business when an armed man approached him.

Again, Zimmerman didn't approach him. He followed him and lost track. No one had seen a gun or could know who was or wasn't armed (Martin too for that matter). He may have been minding his own business...until he CHOSE to return to assault Zimmerman. He became a felon when he initiated the physical assault, as evidence indicates.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by bruteforce13

 

That's supposition and speculation at best.

Wouldn't hold up in court. Because it's a poor argument and not supported by the physical evidence.

Oh I agree with you. But it does show how easy murder could be to get away with. I invite you out somewhere private pretending to be ya friend. Spit in your face then let you get a few punches in my face. Pull out a gun and shoot ya dead.

Viola self defense. Murder IS the easiest thing to get away with cause someone smart is only gonna leave one witness. Themselves.

Originally posted by bates
reply to post by ProfessorChaos

 

is it even in question about who started the confrontation?

has anyone claimed that it was an armed martin who approached an unarmed zimmerman unprovoked?

i genuinely don't see how anyone can claim martin was the one who instigated the trouble.

he was walking to his dads house, completely minding his own business when an armed man approached him.

as soon as zimmerman does that, he's started he trouble.

By your logic, I can see someone who is following me down the street (not doing more than that), get out of his sight, double back and then jump him and beat on him and be completely innocent of any crime, while at the same time, the person I am attacking cannot defend themselves from my attack, or they are not only guilty of a crime, but also the instigator of the attack.

That makes sense to you?

Originally posted by Willtell

All this anger and bitterness by many in this country is typical of the inner hatred and fear of black people that exists in this country.

People think: all blacks are potential criminals, and particularly young ones with hoodies. Indeed therefore it is justified in shooting down a young INNOCENT black boy who may be committing a crime.

All this based on the statistics of crime in urban America.

Urban America was and is created and maintained by the AMERICAN CULTURE and history of slavery and the oppression of black people over 5 centuries.
IT IS AN AMERICAN PHENOMENON! Created and fostered by the racist culture of America.

Black people are not more prone to crime than any other race. It’s just that if you treat a people as black people have been treated by the American experience over 5 centuries then you will produce areas of a broken cultural milieu such as exist in some of urban America: Chicago, Harlem, Detroit, Newark etc…

Look at the condition of the Native Americans. Is that because they are inferior?
Of course not. It’s because of their oppression and genocide experience in America that has weighed down on them over the years.

I strongly beg to differ. By using your logic could you please explain the atrocities committed in the African Countries by those individuals that have never been in the U.S.?

I've been reading about the aftermath of the verdict -- the protestors and violence in the streets, and the outpouring of frustration and anger by blacks at what they feel is a cold blooded murderer walking free. Many people, lots of celebrities among them, have taken to Twitter to voice their displeasure.

I find all of it to be very, very disturbing. It unsettles me on a deep level to not only just believe, but to 'know' based on a great many clear examples, that so many black Americans are very literally obsessed with the fact that a young black man died.

Never mind the details or the findings of a lengthy, complex trial; the sole focus here is on the fact that a young black man died. Cries of racism can be heard everywhere, and people are convinced that's what everything here is about.

Throughout much of the black community, racism is blamed for the reason Trayvon died, and racism is blamed for the reason that Zimmerman was found to be justified in the killing of him. This is regardless of the details, regardless of the facts, regardless of the evidence (or lack thereof), and regardless of common sense.

I'm thinking of what this really means for society as a whole. We very clearly haven't come along as far as many of us thought we had. The racial divides seem as wide and separated as ever.

There is a palpable distrust that I feel from the black community that is directed toward other races; it is just emanating in waves.

I just frankly can't believe how people have reacted about all of this. With all the drama and theatrics revolving around this situation, one would think that George Zimmerman harbored a vile hatred for blacks and, upon noticing a black guy in his neighborhood, simply walked up behind Trayvon and shot him in the back of the head. 'That' would be cold blooded murder, and that's exactly how so many people are treating this situation -- like it was cold blooded murder. It wasn't!

A very sad reality for all Americans is that we live in a country where sense and sensibility are in very short supply, and where people are absolutely ruled by their emotions and not logic.