Teen Killed In Neighborhood Watch Shooting

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

If you are running after someone, and you have no idea where they are, are you "chasing?" Or are you just fucking running?

If you're chasing someone in a direction away from your vehicle and you don't know where they are, do you think you'll end up farther away from your point of origin or closer to it? If you've lost track of a fit 17 year old that is running from you, and you really really want to find him, do you just run in a random direction? Or do you go back to get your car to start cruising the neighborhood looking for him again?

The story and the evidence fit. Anything else is pure wishful thinking. It may end up being correct, but there is nothing at all to support anything but what Zimmerman said happened. That's the "making it up" part.

Are you kidding me? Are you intentionally misinterpreting what people are saying because you are dead set on defending Zimmerman or something?

If you were chasing somebody and they lost you, you were still chasing them.

"He actually did run away, though. Listen to the 911 call. He ran away and Zimmerman chased him. He probably cornered him."

That is what I said. Did Martin run away? Check. Did Zimmerman chase him? Check. Did he corner him? I don't know, but I already stated that was my guess, and anybody who is reading that and not trying to intentionally misinterpret it would understand that.

[Deleted]

Zimmerman claims his head was being smashed into the sidewalk; weapon or no weapon, repeated blows to the head via concrete is reason to believe imminent danger of great bodily harm. The issue is, was his head being smashed into the sidewalk? Thus why the video surveillance footage has been so heavily scrutinized in both directions (for and against)

How do you (on a purely technical level), get your concealed weapon out and point it in an angle square to someones chest with that person on top of you smashing your head into the sidewalk?

[Heilige]

How do you (on a purely technical level), get your concealed weapon out and point it in an angle square to someones chest with that person on top of you smashing your head into the sidewalk?

From a personal standpoint, my weapons are always in a holster on my belt (I use an IWB holster, since in PA they must actually be concealed). However it's not hard to reach, arm anywhere near your side can reach it. We don't know if it was a square shot, angled, or exact distance yet. All that's been publicly released is "one shot to the chest at close range".

Also Berg, I'd like to see your source that Martin was running away and Zimmerman pursued him. Because I haven't read anything of the sort on FOX, CNN or MSNBC - essentially covering all spectrums (Right, slight left, and far left)

[Wells]

If you haven't heard Zimmerman reporting to 911 that Martin was leaving the area then you aren't following very closely.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

From a personal standpoint, my weapons are always in a holster on my belt (inside the waistband with only the butt being visible, since in PA they must actually be concealed). However it's not hard to reach, arm anywhere near your side can reach it. We don't know if it was a square shot, angled, or exact distance yet. All that's been publicly released is "one shot to the chest at close range".

Also Berg, I'd like to see your source that Martin was running away and Zimmerman pursued him. Because I haven't read anything of the sort on FOX, CNN or MSNBC - essentially covering all spectrums (Right, slight left, and far left)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL72w4xiTVU

Skip to around 2 minutes in. Ignore the annoying pictures trying to make Martin out to be an angel.

[Heilige]

If you haven't heard Zimmerman reporting to 911 that Martin was leaving the area then you aren't following very closely.

I know he left the area, but I took that as a foot chase, Martin got out of his truck and looked around, this isn't something he's debating nor is it the main issue here. Zimmerman claims after he lost him (when he infact ran) he walked back to his truck and Martin confronted him. It's what happened here that is the primary issue and what will determine if/what charges are filed.

Barg, apologies for the misunderstanding there - but the term chase led me to believe you meant Zimmerman ran after him instead of walking around looking - I'd personally use the word search but hey, tomato - tomatoe

[KingHorse]

There is nothing Zimmerman has presented to suggest he wasn't an instigator.

Distance. Listen to the tape: 1:10 sounds like he puts the car in park. 2:15 "Shit he's running" and the sound of the idiot alarm telling Zimmerman he has left either his keys in the car or his lights on and his door is open. Quickly followed by the sound of air rushing by the mic on his phone. He was told "They don't need you to [follow Martin]" by the dispatcher. He responded with "OK" and within 10 seconds the wind that was previously rushing across the phone making the conversation hard to hear stopped. 3:37 "Crap, I don't want to give that out loud, I don't know where this kid is" in response to the operator requesting his address. So according to the 911 tape, it's 1:22 between the time he got out and the first time he confirms that he doesn't know where Martin is. You can hear him jogging/running/shuffling fast/whatever for 30 seconds, and you can assume he was walking quickly while not quickly enough to interrupt the conversation with wind. According to the link I noted earlier, the average walking speed of an elderly woman on a city street is 3.89 feet/second. That's 342 ft from his vehicle, if we pretend he was slow as hell the whole time. The discussion continued for 35 seconds more after that. We can even go ahead and assume that Zimmerman stopped the second he mentioned he had lost Martin. Given those very generous assumptions, he would have been 342 ft (114 yds) from his car at that point. Zimmerman said he was attacked when he was on his way back to his car. Martin was shot dead 100 yds from Zimmerman's car.

For chrissake, he even made emergency calls about kids playing in the street. The only thing I see is a justice-obsessed man and a troubled teenager, one of whom was shot and killed.

Justice is clearly bad, right?

The details about who attacked who aren't anywhere close to clear, and information about the people involved only further that.

I've never claimed that it's open and shut, Zimmerman's clearly a great guy, Martin's a bad kid, etc. I've said pretty much what you just said. But I also acknowledge that the evidence fits the story. Because it clearly does.

[Borzo]

Self-defense applies when you are defending yourself, not when you are attacking somebody. If you attack somebody and threaten their life, you don't get the right to kill them because they pulled a gun to defend themselves.

In Florida you do.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Distance. Listen to the tape: 1:10 sounds like he puts the car in park. 2:15 "Shit he's running" and the sound of the idiot alarm telling Zimmerman he has left either his keys in the car or his lights on and his door is open. Quickly followed by the sound of air rushing by the mic on his phone. He was told "They don't need you to [follow Martin]" by the dispatcher. He responded with "OK" and within 10 seconds the wind that was previously rushing across the phone making the conversation hard to hear stopped. 3:37 "Crap, I don't want to give that out loud, I don't know where this kid is" in response to the operator requesting his address. So according to the 911 tape, it's 1:22 between the time he got out and the first time he confirms that he doesn't know where Martin is. You can hear him jogging/running/shuffling fast/whatever for 30 seconds, and you can assume he was walking quickly while not quickly enough to interrupt the conversation with wind. According to the link I noted earlier, the average walking speed of an elderly woman on a city street is 3.89 feet/second. That's 342 ft from his vehicle, if we pretend he was slow as hell the whole time. The discussion continued for 35 seconds more after that. We can even go ahead and assume that Zimmerman stopped the second he mentioned he had lost Martin. Given those very generous assumptions, he would have been 342 ft (114 yds) from his car at that point. Zimmerman said he was attacked when he was on his way back to his car. Martin was shot dead 100 yds from Zimmerman's car.

Going to ignore this part because you're making too many assumptions and trying to use math to prove something with a lack of data.

Justice is clearly bad, right?

Obsession is bad.

I've never claimed that it's open and shut, Zimmerman's clearly a great guy, Martin's a bad kid, etc. I've said pretty much what you just said. But I also acknowledge that the evidence fits the story. Because it clearly does.

Some evidence fits. Some doesn't. His head being slammed on the ground multiple times doesn't fit because you don't skip a trip to the hospital when that happens. There is evidence that his head hit something, but being slammed in the ground in the manner described does not fit.

Another thing that doesn't fit is part of Zimmerman's story. In the recorded 911 call containing screams for help, Zimmerman claims it was him. It has been proven that it was not him.

In Florida you do.

Pretty sure that's called murder.

[Borzo]

It's what happened here that is the primary issue and what will determine if/what charges are filed.

1) We'll never know.
2) Pretty sure it doesn't matter anyways.

---------- Post added 2012-04-03 at 10:45 PM ----------

Pretty sure that's called murder.

In the rest of the world maybe, but in Florida it's called "self-defence".

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

1) We'll never know.
2) Pretty sure it doesn't matter anyways.

---------- Post added 2012-04-03 at 10:45 PM ----------



In the rest of the world maybe, but in Florida it's called "self-defence".

No, even in Florida that is called murder.

[KingHorse]

Another thing that doesn't fit is part of Zimmerman's story. In the recorded 911 call containing screams for help, Zimmerman claims it was him. It has been proven that it was not him.

This has been gone over repeatedly, but I'll state it more clearly than the poor guy who got chased off for it: according to the standards set by the expert who did the analysis, you need 10 different words to get a good comparison. One word "help" was used. He used far less than his own standard of certainty and claimed certainty none the less.

[Borzo]

If you attack somebody and threaten their life, you don't get the right to kill them because they pulled a gun to defend themselves.

No, even in Florida that is called murder.

The law says:

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter [ie stand your ground, self-defence] is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

It clearly states that you can't use self-defence if you initially provoke the fight. But there's a huge unless right after:

1) if you feel you are in danger of death or great harm
2) tried to escape but can't
3) tried to "surrender" or withdraw, but are still being attacked

Zimmerman claims all 3 of these exceptions, so he's off the hook, unless a new witness appears to claim otherwise.

You'll also notice that you can go up to some random person, start a fight, start losing the fight, and then pull out your gun and shoot them. A good lawyer should get you off the hook easily, even if there are some witnesses.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

This has been gone over repeatedly, but I'll state it more clearly than the poor guy who got chased off for it: according to the standards set by the expert who did the analysis, you need 10 different words to get a good comparison. One word "help" was used. He used far less than his own standard of certainty and claimed certainty none the less.

It's far easier to disprove something than it is to prove it, though I will concede the point anyway.

The law says:



It clearly states that you can't use self-defence if you initially provoke the fight. But there's a huge unless right after:

1) if you feel you are in danger of death or great harm
2) tried to escape but can't
3) tried to "surrender" or withdraw, but are still being attacked

Zimmerman claims all 3 of these exceptions, so he's off the hook, unless a new witness appears to claim otherwise.

You'll also notice that you can go up to some random person, start a fight, start losing the fight, and then pull out your gun and shoot them. A good lawyer should get you off the hook easily, even if there are some witnesses.

Ok, fine, Florida law is fucked up, though there are only 2 exceptions, not 3. Also, you can't pick a fight, start losing the fight and kill them. You'd have to be losing to the degree to where it would fit the exception. I also think that feeling of danger/death etc. has the implicated requirement of being reasonable, meaning you can't shoot them because you feel like you'll die because you have a phobia of something that they're doing.

[Badpaladin]

Distance.

Doesn't mean a thing. There is nothing to suggest that Zimmerman was not the instigator.

Justice is clearly bad, right?

Yes, in the hands of people that shoot other people in the name of it. Had this been a police officer, and not some idiot who thinks he's one, Martin would be alive and receiving justice for whatever crime he may have committed( if he did).

I've never claimed that it's open and shut, Zimmerman's clearly a great guy, Martin's a bad kid, etc. I've said pretty much what you just said. But I also acknowledge that the evidence fits the story. Because it clearly does.

I don't acknowledge that it does, because it clearly doesn't. Thus far the only concrete things we can conclude is that:

- Martin was troubled kid(has a good background, but was suspended from school nonetheless)
- Zimmerman is a justice-obsessed man
- Something happened that caused A justice-obsessed man to shoot a troubled kid, but details are completely unclear

That's it. My personal opinion is that Martin did something unlawful, and Zimmerman was clearly not able to approach the situation as a professional would, eventually leading to a scuffle and a dead teenager.

[braeldiil]

He's not being charged (or even arrested) because of the burden of proof put forth by the Stand Your Ground law in Florida before you can arrest someone claiming that sort of self defense.

It flies in the face of common sense and expectation which is why so many people are confused and outraged that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet.

Well, the original investigating officer thought charges should be filed - he found Zimmerman's story inconsistant with the evidence. But it appears that Zimmerman's dad is at least slightly connected, as both the Sheriff and the State's Attorney showed up that night and cut him loose.

After that, the police tried to bury it. They made no effort to access his phone or the records - Trayvon's girlfriend, that he was talking to right before the incident, has yet to be interviewed by the Sanford police. There was no real effort to do in depth followups with the relevant eyewitnesses - the two roomates had to raise a stink with the department for several days just to get someone to talk to them, and then their statements were ignored. The 13-year old who might be the only one to witness the actual confrontation was not visited for 5 days, and the actual interview took place 8 days later. That's 2 days after the "final" report was issued.

Of the 6 witnesses at the scene, 3 have stated on the record that the police report does not accurately represent their statements. Of the 2 that won't go on the record (but have given interviews), one agrees with the report and one calls it an absolute fabrication. Two of the witnesses that are on the record state that the police tried to get them to change their statements to favor Zimmerman.

---------- Post added 2012-04-04 at 03:24 AM ----------

Doesn't mean a thing. There is nothing to suggest that Zimmerman was not the instigator.



Yes, in the hands of people that shoot other people in the name of it. Had this been a police officer, and not some idiot who thinks he's one, Martin would be alive and receiving justice for whatever crime he may have committed( if he did).



I don't acknowledge that it does, because it clearly doesn't. Thus far the only concrete things we can conclude is that:

- Martin was troubled kid(has a good background, but was suspended from school nonetheless)
- Zimmerman is a justice-obsessed man
- Something happened that caused A justice-obsessed man to shoot a troubled kid, but details are completely unclear

That's it. My personal opinion is that Martin did something unlawful, and Zimmerman was clearly not able to approach the situation as a professional would, eventually leading to a scuffle and a dead teenager.

Um, no matter what else Trayvon may have done, he was breaking no laws that night when he was walking home in the rain with skittles. None, zero, ziltch. And if "stand your ground" gives Zimmerman the right to shoot him because Trayvon punched him, it certainly gives Trayvon the right to protect himself from the armed man who was following him in a car and then chased after him.

Seriously, I want to know: What possible crime, other than being black, could Trayvon have possibly committed that night?

[obdigore]

Well, the original investigating officer thought charges should be filed - he found Zimmerman's story inconsistant with the evidence. But it appears that Zimmerman's dad is at least slightly connected, as both the Sheriff and the State's Attorney showed up that night and cut him loose.

After that, the police tried to bury it. They made no effort to access his phone or the records - Trayvon's girlfriend, that he was talking to right before the incident, has yet to be interviewed by the Sanford police. There was no real effort to do in depth followups with the relevant eyewitnesses - the two roomates had to raise a stink with the department for several days just to get someone to talk to them, and then their statements were ignored. The 13-year old who might be the only one to witness the actual confrontation was not visited for 5 days, and the actual interview took place 8 days later. That's 2 days after the "final" report was issued.

Of the 6 witnesses at the scene, 3 have stated on the record that the police report does not accurately represent their statements. Of the 2 that won't go on the record, one agrees with the report and one calls it an absolute fabrication. Two of the witnesses that are on the record state that the police tried to get them to change their statements to favor Zimmerman.

---------- Post added 2012-04-04 at 03:24 AM ----------



Um, no matter what else Trayvon may have done, he was breaking no laws that night when he was walking home in the rain with skittles. None, zero, ziltch. And if "stand your ground" gives Zimmerman the right to shoot him because Trayvoin punched him, it certainly gives Trayvon the right to protect himself from the armed man who was following him in a car and then chased after him.

Seriously, I want to know: What possible crime, other than being black, could Trayvon have possibly committed that night?

Six witnesses? You have the two girl roommates who saw nothing until after the shooting (Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla). Someone who saw two men fighting, heard a shot, and then saw Zimmerman looking distraught(Anonymous witness), and the 'girlfriend' who took a month to come forward with what she heard, which was just two questions then nothing since the phone went dead.

Everyone else hid in their homes, despite a man outside screaming for help.

[Borzo]

Ok, fine, Florida law is fucked up, though there are only 2 exceptions, not 3. Also, you can't pick a fight, start losing the fight and kill them. You'd have to be losing to the degree to where it would fit the exception. I also think that feeling of danger/death etc. has the implicated requirement of being reasonable, meaning you can't shoot them because you feel like you'll die because you have a phobia of something that they're doing.

Yeah but this is where it gets murky and stupid.

If you start a fight, and you start losing badly, you have to be losing so badly that you feel your life is in danger (in order to shoot them).

If there are no witnesses, then you are home free, because you can effectively say anything. "He said he was gonna shoot me, then he reached into his pocket for what looked like a gun!" No one will be able to argue against you.

If there ARE witnesses, then it's trickier. You have to try to stop the fight, and the other guy has to keep beating you, and you have to try to run away. If the witnesses say that those things didn't happen, then you are probably screwed... UNLESS you say you thought he was pulling out a gun! In that case you can't escape (can't outrun a bullet), and you can justifiably say you felt your life was in danger (it's a gun!). Of course, you could be making this shit up... but that's the problem with this law: no one knows what's in your head, just you. This law protects you if you claim to have fear... and that's pretty easy to fake. The word "reasonable" is there, sure, but WTF is "reasonable" anyways? That's a gray zone that's hard to define and really depends on how good your lawyer is, more than anything else.

[Murmaidor]

The one and true thing that is certain is that the media breeds hate among everyone black and white. Causing blacks and whites to lock horns on issues by dragging out the situation and dramatizing it till the last minute. Just like Christians and Muslim issues in America they will as well feed us all the negative input without bringing in a minute of unity among us. Media does nothing but bring negative emotions among people and does nothing to be optimistic on any issue. Was the shooter a idiot, absolutely and should be punished by his ignorant actions.. But the truth of the whole matter is that it is not all over the media simply because a man shot a boy. It is because a white man shot a black boy. If it was the other way around it might have made the local media but no further than that. But the media wants it to be everywhere, and look at what it does to us all black and white. Without unity we are nothing. This kind stuff happens everywhere in all walks of life. My heart goes out to the family for their loss it truly does no parent should have to suffer such a loss. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson by the way are among some of the countries biggest racists and if you are truly against racism then a cold shoulder should be applied to their selfish and ignorant agendas.

[Droids]

Does nobody blame the parents?

They were terrible parents who raised a terrible child.

I was suspended once from school, I honestly don't remember what it was, and it was just for a day. My father stayed home from work and I had to dig a ditch a certain depth and a certain length, and if I didn't finish that day, he was going to keep me home the next as well. His reasoning was if you aren't going to take school seriously, you might as start getting used to hard labor and long days of it. I was also grounded for a few weeks. No TV, friends, going out, etc.

Trayvon was suspended from school multiple times for drug possession, truancy, vandalism and possession of stolen jewelry.

At the time this altercation happened he had just been suspended yet again for drugs. His parent's thought it was alright for the child to walk to the store late at night through a high crime area for candy and pop?

Terrible parents raise terrible kids and then it's everyone elses fault when something bad happens to their child.

Seriously, what sane, caring parent lets their underage child walk to the store really late at night through a high crime area for candy and pop, after getting suspended from school?