(05-24-2013, 09:55 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 09:32 AM)sally Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 09:21 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]Did GZ have a right to confront Martin, Depends. Depends on if he was calm or an asshole, IMO.
How do you figure it depends? GZ was in his truck and Martin was walking. The cops told GZ to stop following him and he didn't listen. Unless the kid was robbing an old lady on the street corner he had absolutely no reason to confront him.
This is where you and I disagree.
I don't think GZ actually ever confronted T. Yes, he was 'stalking' him as many here like to say. I prefer 'following at a distance' ON FOOT. He's now out of his truck as he muttered 'these guys always get away'.
Thinking he's lost him Z is now returning to his truck. This is where T jumps him, knocking him to the ground.
At this point, with someone on top of him, I could understand Z going for his gun.
IMO, this makes T the actual aggressor in this case.
I've said it before in this thread. If you're going to bumrush somebody, make sure they're unarmed, or take their weapon from them.
This is exactly my point, your version is very different from the others above.
NO ONE can say what happened that night. It is all speculation at this point. No video evidence of the event, no witness to the actually event.
(05-24-2013, 09:48 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]Actually the "COPS" did not tell him to stop, this was a 911 dispatcher. They are not police officers, they are dispatchers. They can advise a person what to do, but the person does not legally have to listen to what they are advised.
Why the hell ring 911 and then ignore the advice given by someone trained and experienced in dealing with and handling emergency calls? A person REPRESENTING the police force?
You think a glorified security guard is in a better position to make a judgement call than a police dispatcher? The police despatcher may not have been a cop but NEITHER WAS ZIMMERMAN.
(05-24-2013, 10:03 AM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 09:48 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]Actually the "COPS" did not tell him to stop, this was a 911 dispatcher. They are not police officers, they are dispatchers. They can advise a person what to do, but the person does not legally have to listen to what they are advised.
Why the hell ring 911 and then ignore the advice given by someone trained and experienced in dealing with and handling emergency calls? A person REPRESENTING the police force?
You think a glorified security guard is in a better position to make a judgement call than a police dispatcher? The police despatcher may not have been a cop but NEITHER WAS ZIMMERMAN.
The point you're making actually supports my theory that Z did not confront T.
Z knew better than that, however, he also wanted this person observed until the cops did arrive.
He 'lost' him in the rain and darkness and on his way back to his truck, T jumped him.
If evidence comes out at trial that I'm wrong, I'll gladly welcome all the 'I told you so's
[quote='Midwest Spy' pid='321671' dateline='1369404592']
The point you're making actually supports my theory that Z did not confront T.
[Quote]
How the hell do you come to that bullshit conclusion?
Zimmerman IGNORED the advice of the police dispatcher and continued to follow Trayvon thus making a confrontation MORE likely.
The longer you follow someone the MORE likely they are to feel genuinely threatened and fearful its natural human instinct. Nobody likes to be followed especially when you have no idea who the hell it is.
(05-24-2013, 10:07 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 09:55 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]IMO, this makes T the actual aggressor in this case.
You must be joking or you are not comprehending what you are reading.
What if your wife left the market & I began to follow her in a sneaky way, do you think she would be unnerved? Do you think it would scare her to have someone right behind her watching her every move? How would you feel if she called you & told you that someone was stalking her and yes, it was stalking. That kid didn't know who George was. Would your wife be the aggressor if she confronted me for following her? Huh? Huh? Huh?
You're definition of stalking is way different than mine.
I don't believe he was stalking him. Observing at a distance is what I think.
Also, if my wife feels she's being stalked by someone on a dark, rainy night, I'd like her to either call me, the police, or knock on one of the several doors (that were right next to T) as she's being stalked.
He was a wannabe thug-life punk, who envisioned himself as being able to handle a guy like that on his own.
He just needed to be able to blind-side him and then he'd show him who he was fucking with.
He just didn't plan on him having a gun.
(05-24-2013, 10:18 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]He was a wannabe thug-life punk, who envisioned himself as being able to handle a guy like that on his own.
You have proof of this? Does the kid have any history of violence or crime other then smoking pot? I could have missed something, but I didn't read anywhere that he did.
And your scenario that Martin snuck off into dark night and hid behind the bushes waiting for Zimmerman to return to his truck so he could bum rush him is absolutely ridiculous.
(05-24-2013, 10:36 AM)sally Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 10:18 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]He was a wannabe thug-life punk, who envisioned himself as being able to handle a guy like that on his own.
You have proof of this? Does the kid have any history of violence or crime other then smoking pot? I could have missed something, but I didn't read anywhere that he did.
And your scenario that Martin snuck off into dark night and hid behind the bushes waiting for Zimmerman to return to his truck so he could bum rush him is absolutely ridiculous.
It sounds ridiculous, BUT DO YOU know he didn't??
There have been a lot of twitters postings from his friends, and FB posting from his friends of MARTINS own admission of a "thug type" life. If you go back a little bit, I saw a couple posted on here. But it is just talk, we don't have verification of any actions. OTHER then the school bus incident.
(05-24-2013, 10:18 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]You're definition of stalking is way different than mine.
I don't believe he was stalking him. Observing at a distance is what I think.
Also, if my wife feels she's being stalked by someone on a dark, rainy night, I'd like her to either call me, the police, or knock on one of the several doors (that were right next to T) as she's being stalked.
He was a wannabe thug-life punk, who envisioned himself as being able to handle a guy like that on his own.
He just needed to be able to blind-side him and then he'd show him who he was fucking with.
He just didn't plan on him having a gun.
What else would you call being followed relentlessly by a complete stranger? Maybe i should come over to your hometown and “observe” your wife “from a distance” she could be up to something as far as I know right?
As for your “thug life punk” comment? What evidence have you got for that? He smokes weed? At his age he would be in the minority if he didn't. He listens to gangsta rap? So do i sometimes does that make me a gangsta too blood? I don't think so, anymore than listening to opera makes you a fat italian. And flipping the bird? Who hasn't done that from time to time?
So where's the other evidence he was a “thug life gangsta wannabe”?
(05-24-2013, 10:39 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]There have been a lot of twitters postings from his friends, and FB posting from his friends of MARTINS own admission of a "thug type" life. If you go back a little bit, I saw a couple posted on here. But it is just talk, we don't have verification of any actions. OTHER then the school bus incident.
Yeah because teenagers never show off or boast online and try to make themselves out to be tougher, harder and more streetwise than they ever will be in real life do they?
Ha ha!
Do me a favour do you honestly think only genuine gangstas show off on twitter? You're deluded.
(05-24-2013, 12:14 AM)username Wrote: [ -> ]Bull.shit. You've refused from the get-go to acknowledge that George STALKED Trayvon. Poor George. HotD has tried to show you both sides of the argument and yet you insist on defending Zimmerman without hearing the evidence. You're a close minded bastard. You still haven't answered my question about TRAYVON'S right to stand his ground. If someone is sneakily following you around, do you have a right to confront them and even engage them physically if you're fearful for your life? Huh?
Just as you and others insist on convicting Zimmerman without hearing the evidence. So who is calling who a closed minded bastard? I read and look at the evidence that is available, and so far Zimmerman's account of what happened that night is definitely plausible. Nothing more, nothing less than plausible. I can't dismiss it out of hand that he is lying or is a pussy scumbag who had a beat down coming.
As I've said MANY times, is George a douche? Yes. Was he overzealous? Yep. Doe he probably suffer from some wanna-be-LEO syndrome? Perhaps.
But taking the step of concluding that because Zimmerman followed Martin, whatever happened after that was all fair game isn't how the system works. Concluding that Martin had every right to beat Zimmerman to a bloody pulp just because he was stalked is lunacy. The law doesn't work that way... you don't have that right.
If you are being followed around your neighborhood, do you have the right to attack and beat the person following you? Of course you don't. But there seems to be an argument here that somehow that is a reasonable reaction if that occurs.
What if your husband walked down the street to check on the car that turned out its lights, rolled to a stop, and parked near your house? Do the occupants of the car have the right to beat your husband for 'stalking' them? Will you defend him if he gets in a scuffle with the occupants, and he shoots one of them to defend himself? Or will you just say he had it coming because he shouldn't have gotten involved?
(05-24-2013, 10:47 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ][quote='Cynical Ninja' pid='321682' dateline='1369406690']
I think some of them think that because he was talkin' shit to his pals on FB. He was 16⁄17 for fuckssake, that's what kids do, even I know that.[/i][/size]
Exactly.
The people trying to shift the blame for this incident onto the victim are seriously clutching at anything they can get their hands on its pathetic.
They seem to have a real problem with even the idea of a black youth being an innocent victim.
(05-24-2013, 10:51 AM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 10:39 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]There have been a lot of twitters postings from his friends, and FB posting from his friends of MARTINS own admission of a "thug type" life. If you go back a little bit, I saw a couple posted on here. But it is just talk, we don't have verification of any actions. OTHER then the school bus incident.
Yeah because teenagers never show off or boast online and try to make themselves out to be tougher, harder and more streetwise than they ever will be in real life do they?
Ha ha!
Do me a favour do you honestly think only genuine gangstas show off on twitter? You're deluded.
That is NOT what I was saying at all. I STATED it was JUST TALK, and that their was NO PROOF of the actually actions. That is what I said!
But in reading an article about the text messages Martin wrote, and that the defense obtained, he sounds like a "wonderful" kid. lol
****One of Martin's cell phone pictures shows two teens about to square off against one another as a third stands in the middle like a referee. Martin said he fought a rival who "snitched on me."
Martin: "I lost da 1st round 
but won da 2nd nd 3rd."
Friend: "Ohhh So It Wass 3 Rounds? Damn well at least yu wonn lol but yuu needa stop fighting."
Martin: "Nay im not done with fool..... he gone hav 2 see me again."
Friend: "Nooo... Stop, yuu waint gonn bee satisified till yuh suspended again, huh?"
Martin told another friend at the time that his mother wanted him to move in with his dad after he was suspended.
"Da police caught me outta skool," Martin wrote.
Months later, Martin appeared to get in trouble again, but suggested on Jan. 6, 2012, that he was an innocent bystander: "'I was watcn a fight nd a teacher say I hit em." The following month he complained he got in trouble for something "I didn't do."
In between these messages, he appears to flirt with a girl and talk extensively about smoking marijuana, or "kush." One friend called him a "WEEDHEAD."
Martin's troubles appeared to get worse and, on Feb. 13, he explained to a friend that he was serving "10 dayz" of suspension.
Five days later, he repeatedly appears to inquire about a gun with a friend: "U got heat??" Hours later he's asked by text: "You want a 22 revolver?" The friend who sent the message said it was bought by "my mommy."
On Feb. 21, Martin appeared to be heading to Sanford to live with his father. But he hadn't lost interest in guns.
"U wanna share a .380?" he asked one friend.***
(05-24-2013, 10:57 AM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 10:47 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ][quote='Cynical Ninja' pid='321682' dateline='1369406690']
I think some of them think that because he was talkin' shit to his pals on FB. He was 16⁄17 for fuckssake, that's what kids do, even I know that.[/i][/size]
Exactly.
The people trying to shift the blame for this incident onto the victim are seriously clutching at anything they can get their hands on its pathetic.
They seem to have a real problem with even the idea of a black youth being an innocent victim.
SEE again it is NOT about a "black youth", it is about a teenager walking in a neighborhood and being shot by a overzealous person. Not a black youth being shot by a Hispanic/black/white guy.
I represent A LOT of "black youths" as you say, that ARE in fact innocent. That is not what I am saying, I am saying that instead of believing what you THINK happened, look at the facts of the case NOT speculation. NO ONE can say what happened on that night for sure.
(05-24-2013, 10:58 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ] (05-24-2013, 10:53 AM)Jimbone Wrote: [ -> ]What if your husband walked down the street to check on the car that turned out its lights, rolled to a stop, and parked near your house?
Anyone with a grain of common sense would remain in their home & wait for the cops to arrive. Which is what George should have done but he had to be Rambo and take the law into his own hands.
I agree with you on this one.
(05-24-2013, 10:58 AM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]
Anyone with a grain of common sense would remain in their home & wait for the cops to arrive. Which is what George should have done but he had to be Rambo and take the law into his own hands.
Well George did say that he was returning to his truck to wait for the police when Trayvon jumped him... but I'm sure he's just lying.
(05-24-2013, 10:58 AM)LytoMe Wrote: [ -> ]That is NOT what I was saying at all. I STATED it was JUST TALK, and that their was NO PROOF of the actually actions. That is what I said!
But in reading an article about the text messages Martin wrote, and that the defense obtained, he sounds like a "wonderful" kid. lol
****One of Martin's cell phone pictures shows two teens about to square off against one another as a third stands in the middle like a referee. Martin said he fought a rival who "snitched on me."
Martin: "I lost da 1st round but won da 2nd nd 3rd."
Friend: "Ohhh So It Wass 3 Rounds? Damn well at least yu wonn lol but yuu needa stop fighting."
Martin: "Nay im not done with fool..... he gone hav 2 see me again."
Friend: "Nooo... Stop, yuu waint gonn bee satisified till yuh suspended again, huh?"
Martin told another friend at the time that his mother wanted him to move in with his dad after he was suspended.
"Da police caught me outta skool," Martin wrote.
Months later, Martin appeared to get in trouble again, but suggested on Jan. 6, 2012, that he was an innocent bystander: "'I was watcn a fight nd a teacher say I hit em." The following month he complained he got in trouble for something "I didn't do."
In between these messages, he appears to flirt with a girl and talk extensively about smoking marijuana, or "kush." One friend called him a "WEEDHEAD."
Martin's troubles appeared to get worse and, on Feb. 13, he explained to a friend that he was serving "10 dayz" of suspension.
Five days later, he repeatedly appears to inquire about a gun with a friend: "U got heat??" Hours later he's asked by text: "You want a 22 revolver?" The friend who sent the message said it was bought by "my mommy."
On Feb. 21, Martin appeared to be heading to Sanford to live with his father. But he hadn't lost interest in guns.
"U wanna share a .380?" he asked one friend.***
So even TALKING about guns is proof you are a “thug life gangsta” now is it?
And “flirting with girls”, “smoking weed”, and “getting into a fight”? Yeah clearly this guy was the next washington sniper in the making!
Girls, drugs and fighting sort of just sums up what its like to be a teenage bloke these days.
