George Zimmerman Trial


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby odelltrclan » Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:25 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:That is because you see this only through race colored glasses and expect everyone else to see it the same biased way you do. You completely ignore the fact that we are dealing with two minorities here, though you keep referring to Zimmerman as white. Thank God our society allows for a person to be tried in a court of law, hopefully by a jury representative of people unlike you.

Coming from an intolerant, right-wing Bible-thumper like yourself, your criticism mean absolutely nothing to me. Thank God, folks like you are going the way of the dinosaur.


Once again, so sad. Resorting to name calling because your arguments are weak. Who is the intolerant one? I had asked politely once before for you to put me on ignore and not respond to my posts and agreed to do the same. You started this. Once again, please put me on ignore and resist the temptation to respond.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:49 am

jazzcyclist wrote:Are you out of your mind? How Orwellian can you be? Zimmerman stalked Martin, Martin didn't stalk Zimmerman. Facts don't change according to your ability to stomach them.

What the fuck did Martin have to do with these break-ins? You obviously started this thread with an agenda. I guess you also think Emmitt Till had it coming.


First, he wasn't stalking. The legal definition of stalking is repeated following and harassing. He was followed, he was not stalked. Use the correct word.

Second, following is not a crime. Even if it were to reach the level of harassment, physical violence is not a valid solution, legally or ethically.

Third, grow-up. I never said anybody deserved anything. He was dressed in a suspicious manner, which made Zimmerman believe he could have been involved in a string of robberies. That is why he was followed, which is again, not a crime.

I am not ethnically similar to either man, so drop the race baiting and learn to discuss things like an adult.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:51 am

18.99s wrote:The altercation took place over 150 feet from his vehicle. If you look at the map of the complex and take note of the scale (see http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magaz ... -and-Fear/), it's clear that no car could park close to the location of the altercation, unless it drove up onto the grass and turned behind a row of townhomes.


And 3-5 minutes after the phone call. There was more than enough time for TM to get home if he was in fact going there. Likewise, if GZ was actively pursuing him towards his home, he would have covered more ground if that's where TM was in fact going. 150ft is extremely close by, especially in the given timeframe. If TM was heading home, he would have arrived and there would be no altercation. It is a myth that GZ continued to pursue him.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby TrakFan » Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:56 am

dustoff wrote:He was dressed in a suspicious manner, which made Zimmerman believe...


Now wearing a hoodie is considered suspicious? God forbid some kid decides to cover his head at night. :roll:
TrakFan
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:58 am

jhc68 wrote:Late at night a guy with a handgun follows another guy, first in his car and then on foot. The guy with the gun calls 911 and then instead of wating for cops to arrive, and against the advice of the emergency contact, he continues to follow. Very dumb. Not behavior that a normal person would follow.
There is no evidence that he continued to follow TM.
The guy being followed, instead of calling home or 911, calls his friend who tells him to run but instead, he turns around to confront the stalker. Very dumb. But in truth, I might have done the same thing when I was 17.
I agree with this, but unfortunately, it does not have any legal standing in his support. Hell, in the wrong emotional state, I may even do it now. That would not, however, make me any less culpable for my actions.
[quote
A fist fight ensues and the guy with the gun uses it to kill the guy he had been stalking.

Seems to me that if someone (not a cop) decides to pursue someone else (who is minding his own business) and identifies the person being followed as one of these "Fucking punks. These assholes. They always get away." and then he kills the unarmed person with a bullet at point blank range then the guy with the gun is guilty of something... some category of manslaughter at the very least.[/quote]

First, he wasn't stalking by the legal definition. Following him was entirely in his right, even if he were to do it by foot. Second, we need to define fight. Every bit of evidence indicates TM escalated the situation to a level of violence and had no regard for the life of either of them, throwing the first punch and then mounting him, and punching him in the head repeatedly. He had every chance to choose to not escalate it to a level of violence or even stay off GZ. He chose to put himself into a position where the only option GZ seems to have had, to end the beating, was to shoot him.

Unarmed has absolutely nothing to do with it. If you start a fight and are beating somebody, they have every right to use a weapon of their choice to end the conflict. People carry guns, legally, every day and they sometimes have to use them, justifiably, even against 'unarmed' individuals. Being unarmed or gunless does not make you a safe person to be around. Judging by a broken nose and gashes on GZ's head, I think he was certainly beaten pretty viciously before the conflict ended.

If GZ was planning to use his gun or even be in a physical confrontation, I can only imagine it would have never gotten to the point that he was lucky to be alive and conscious.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:00 pm

TrakFan wrote:
dustoff wrote:He was dressed in a suspicious manner, which made Zimmerman believe...


Now wearing a hoodie is considered suspicious? God forbid some kid decides to cover his head at night. :roll:


Look, wearing a black hoodie with the hood up in Florida is suspicious, regardless of your skin color. I'm not saying that means he needs to be arrested or anything, I am simply saying it makes you appear suspicious. I would certainly be sure to not be on the same side of the street at night as a person who looks like that.

I am explaining why he was followed. He appeared suspicious because he fit the description of people involved in a number of robberies in the neighborhood. It is perfectly reasonable that somebody on a neighborhood watch may believe he was one of the people involved.

Even Trayvon's mother has said that he was likely targeted because of the way he was presenting himself, not because he was black.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:04 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:Coming from an intolerant, right-wing Bible-thumper like yourself, your criticism mean absolutely nothing to me. Thank God, folks like you are going the way of the dinosaur.


That's just uncalled for and your attitude is appalling.

I am not ethnically similar to either man and my fiance is black and my future child will be mixed race, including black.

Having a different opinion than you or the mainstream media doesn't mean that somebody is racist. It seems like you don't know a thing about the case.

I made this thread because MY VIEWS about the case were challenged and changed. I thought this was a clear cut case and had forgotten about it until recently. Now that I have followed the trial, watched much of the testimony, and read more of the facts involved, my previous view has been shattered and my opinion of the situation has changed dramatically. I was curious to see if this was true for anybody else and why.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:07 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:I have a feeling that if the situation was reversed - a White kid was shot by a Black neighborhood vigilante who saw him innocently walking through a Black neighborhood - I seriously doubt that a lot of you folks would be singing the same tune.


What's with your racism? You realize Zimmerman is hispanic, right? As I said in another post, I am unrelated to either race, except for my fiance being black.

It is quite obvious you haven't followed the case at all. Your opinions lie in half-truths and omit numerous other facts. You believe that Trayvon was some little kid when he was bigger than Zimmerman! You don't have a clue about what you are talking about and sound like a child.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby TrakFan » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:08 pm

dustoff wrote:Look, wearing a black hoodie with the hood up in Florida is suspicious, regardless of your skin color. I'm not saying that means he needs to be arrested or anything, I am simply saying it makes you appear suspicious.


Interesting -- Your comments are very revealing.

BTW, that must be a "cultural thing" where you're from?? I have family throughout Florida, and none of them are suspicious of a kid wearing a hood.
TrakFan
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby Dutra5 » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:18 pm

I live in Florida and it isn't unusual at all to see teenagers walking around with hoodies.

Zimmerman should get a manslaughter verdict against him.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:22 pm

TrakFan wrote:Interesting -- Your comments are very revealing.

BTW, that must be a "cultural thing" where you're from?? I have family throughout Florida, and none of them are suspicious of a kid wearing a hood.


What is revealing?

Look, I'm not saying anything about whether or not hoodies are legal. I am explaining to you why GZ was suspicious. TM was 5'11" walking through a neighborhood that just had a string of robberies with his hood up at night and he fit the description of some involved. Would I have followed him? Probably not, but I don't live there and wasn't in the position.

You are focusing on the wrong things. None of this matters. Following him through public ways is entirely legal and in no way stalking. There is nothing illegal about it, regardless of whatever reason he may have been followed. Even Martin's mother has said that she believes he was followed because of how he was presenting himself, not because of his race. I don't know how much clearer it could be.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby 18.99s » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:25 pm

dustoff wrote:And 3-5 minutes after the phone call. There was more than enough time for TM to get home if he was in fact going there.

That doesn't give Zimmerman the right to pursue and confront and shoot him. TM also would have been justifiably afraid of letting GZ see where he was staying, especially considering that his little brother was in there.

Likewise, if GZ was actively pursuing him towards his home, he would have covered more ground if that's where TM was in fact going. 150ft is extremely close by, especially in the given timeframe. If TM was heading home, he would have arrived and there would be no altercation. It is a myth that GZ continued to pursue him.


GZ pursued long enough to be over 50 yards from his car, around the corner behind a row of townhomes. TM didn't haul him out of his car and drag him over there.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:26 pm

Dutra5 wrote:I live in Florida and it isn't unusual at all to see teenagers walking around with hoodies.

Zimmerman should get a manslaughter verdict against him.


Based on what? What definition of manslaughter are you looking at?

GZ wasn't committing any crime when he followed TM.

TM, by all accounts, initiated a violent confrontation and was on top of the man beating him. Had GZ died, that would be an example of manslaughter. If GZ threw the first punch or had his gun drawn to begin with, that would probably fit a definition of manslaughter. Neither of those appear to have happened though, based on the evidence presented.

I am not sure of any definition of manslaughter that would fit the actions of GZ that night.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby Dutra5 » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:37 pm

dustoff wrote:
Dutra5 wrote:I live in Florida and it isn't unusual at all to see teenagers walking around with hoodies.

Zimmerman should get a manslaughter verdict against him.


Based on what? What definition of manslaughter are you looking at?



He got into a fight which resulted in him shooting a guy to death.

Frankly, if you're going to follow me as Zimmerman was following Martin, there will be a confrontation of some sort.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby 18.99s » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:39 pm

dustoff wrote:GZ wasn't committing any crime when he followed TM.


But he committed a crime by shooting TM. It's not self defense when you kill somebody who is fighting you to protect him/herself from the imminent threat you created. Following somebody like what GZ did is very threatening. If somebody followed you like that, you would feel threatened.

Had GZ died, that would be an example of manslaughter.

If GZ died, that would be TM acting in self-defense.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 pm

18.99s wrote:That doesn't give Zimmerman the right to pursue and confront and shoot him. TM also would have been justifiably afraid of letting GZ see where he was staying, especially considering that his little brother was in there.
Well, he didn't pursue then shoot him. He pursued, stopped, was attacked, and after being beaten, shot him. It is a completely different series of events.

If TM was afraid for his life, why did he attack GZ? After hitting him once, why did he mount him and beat him further? That is assault no matter how you slice it and shooting him is a justified response.

GZ pursued long enough to be over 50 yards from his car, around the corner behind a row of townhomes. TM didn't haul him out of his car and drag him over there.


50 yards is an extremely short distance. It doesn't matter if GZ followed him right up to his home. None of that matters as none of it justifies, legally, a physical assault.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:49 pm

18.99s wrote:But he committed a crime by shooting TM. It's not self defense when you kill somebody who is fighting you to protect him/herself from the imminent threat you created. Following somebody like what GZ did is very threatening. If somebody followed you like that, you would feel threatened.

If GZ died, that would be TM acting in self-defense.


Wow, are you that dense? At no point was TM assaulted before he attacked GZ. In fact, he had the opportunity to go to his home and instead chose to approach and attack GZ. There is no evidence o imminent threat and, in fact, evidence to the contrary, based on the fact that he chose to approach GZ.

There is no evidence GZ threatened TM's life. TM wasn't defending himself from anything. You don't have the legal right to assault somebody because they are following you. You realize that, right? You also realize that following somebody is not illegal?
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby 18.99s » Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:56 pm

dustoff wrote:Wow, are you that dense? At no point was TM assaulted before he attacked GZ. In fact, he had the opportunity to go to his home and instead chose to approach and attack GZ.

There is no evidence that TM approached GZ, other than GZ's own claims.

There is no evidence GZ threatened TM's life.

He threatened TM's life by getting out of his car to follow him and continuing to follow until they had a close confrontation. Every year thousands of teens go missing or get killed by somebody who pursued them just like GZ pursued TM.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby dustoff » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:03 pm

18.99s wrote:There is no evidence that TM approached GZ, other than GZ's own claims.
He threatened TM's life by getting out of his car to follow him and continuing to follow until they had a close confrontation. Every year thousands of teens go missing or get killed by somebody who pursued them just like GZ pursued TM.

None of that is illegal. I don't understand why this is hard for you to grasp. Pursuing somebody is neither a crime nor justification to hit somebody.

Further, the evidence indicates TM changed his direction and headed for GZ. Using the evidence available, the most reasonable conclusion was that he approached GZ.
dustoff
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:58 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby mump boy » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:10 pm

dustoff wrote:
And for all the people that post pictures of little 12y/o Trayvon, maybe they forgot he was much older and quite the thug (or wannabe thug, at least): http://nyencore.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... 052313.jpg


You seem to be the only one here who has made up their mind without seeing all the evidence and your rather offensive statement above, about a dead child, shows EXACTLY why there is a racial element to this trial and why it is absolutely right that people are calling it out.

And he wasn't a 'suspected criminal' to anyone other than GZ, he was a kid walking home.
mump boy
 
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:11 pm

dustoff wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:I have a feeling that if the situation was reversed - a White kid was shot by a Black neighborhood vigilante who saw him innocently walking through a Black neighborhood - I seriously doubt that a lot of you folks would be singing the same tune.


What's with your racism? You realize Zimmerman is hispanic, right? As I said in another post, I am unrelated to either race, except for my fiance being black.

What does Zimmerman's race/ethnicity have to do with anything. Are you implying that Hispanics are incapable of racism?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:14 pm

dustoff wrote:Look, wearing a black hoodie with the hood up in Florida is suspicious, regardless of your skin color.

Even when when it's raining? Come on man! :roll:
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby 18.99s » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:14 pm

dustoff wrote:None of that is illegal. I don't understand why this is hard for you to grasp. Pursuing somebody is neither a crime nor justification to hit somebody.

Pursuing somebody like GZ did is very threatening, and creates a justification for the pursued individual to defend themselves against that threat.

Further, the evidence indicates TM changed his direction and headed for GZ.

There is not a shred of evidence supporting that, other than GZ's own words.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby mump boy » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:15 pm

dustoff wrote: He was dressed in a suspicious manner


I'm trying to think of a polite way of addressing this statement but i can't.

I think i'll leave it there rather than get banned
mump boy
 
Posts: 5637
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:16 pm

mump boy wrote:You seem to be the only one here who has made up their mind without seeing all the evidence

I wouldn't go that far. Odel seems to be as fucked up in the head as him.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:18 pm

dustoff wrote: He was dressed in a suspicious manner

How should one dress at night when it's raining?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby odelltrclan » Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:35 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
mump boy wrote:You seem to be the only one here who has made up their mind without seeing all the evidence

I wouldn't go that far. Odel seems to be as fucked up in the head as him.


How many times are they going to give you a pass before your banned!
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Postby gh » Sun Jun 30, 2013 2:26 pm

please don't try to play cop. There are no bannable posts here.

But we're veering off enough into unconfortable territory that the discussion is over.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests