Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This was my take before Al Sharpton came to town and the family started selling DVDs:
1. Man with gun shoots and kills young man.
Then the media started posting 6th grade photos of Martin instead of the many they had of him at age 17 and in the 12th grade.
2. Incident report clearly states evidence collected and sent to crime lab. No charges to date. Would I be upset over this if I was the family? Hell yes and did they do anything wrong yelling about that? Hell no. Would have done the same thing. But they were told that the crime lab reports take months and months sometimes. Should they have charged him. Probably yes but that MEANS NOTHING.
The only fact that you've presented is that a 17 year old kid was murdered.
You did not see the 6th grade photos that media had out of Martin for a month?
Incident report clearly stated evidence sent to crime lab.
Crime labs due to massive drug case backlog can take as long as 6 months to forward results to the DA's office.
Are you stupid or something?
This was my take before Al Sharpton came to town and the family started selling DVDs:
1. Man with gun shoots and kills young man.
Then the media started posting 6th grade photos of Martin instead of the many they had of him at age 17 and in the 12th grade.
2. Incident report clearly states evidence collected and sent to crime lab. No charges to date. Would I be upset over this if I was the family? Hell yes and did they do anything wrong yelling about that? Hell no. Would have done the same thing. But they were told that the crime lab reports take months and months sometimes. Should they have charged him. Probably yes but that MEANS NOTHING.
he was told NOT to follow...
i'd say that it's obvious you think it's ok that he hunted an unarmed kid.
He NEVER WAS TOLD NOT TO FOLLOW.
Quit reading the BS media.
"You do not have to do that" is NOT being told NOT to follow.
what are you babbling about?
he absolutely was told not to follow. the EXACT words were "we don't need you to do that".
maybe you should start reading actual news sources instead of rightwingnut blogs.
1. Man with gun shoots and kills young man.
Then the media started posting 6th grade photos of Martin instead of the many they had of him at age 17 and in the 12th grade.
2. Incident report clearly states evidence collected and sent to crime lab. No charges to date. Would I be upset over this if I was the family? Hell yes and did they do anything wrong yelling about that? Hell no. Would have done the same thing. But they were told that the crime lab reports take months and months sometimes. Should they have charged him. Probably yes but that MEANS NOTHING.
The media's insistence on using a old photo is a drop in the ocean of the media bias on this case, which is the same bias the media has all the time.
Why should the police have charged Zimmerman in the first place? Zimmerman called 911 and was assaulted, before he shot the African. There is no evidence this wasn't self-defense and a fair amount of evidence that it was self-defense.
If I had raised a piece of shit like Trayvon, I'd first repent and then I'd apologize to Mr. Zimmerman that my flesh-and-blood assaulted him.
This was my take before Al Sharpton came to town and the family started selling DVDs:
1. Man with gun shoots and kills young man.
Then the media started posting 6th grade photos of Martin instead of the many they had of him at age 17 and in the 12th grade.
2. Incident report clearly states evidence collected and sent to crime lab. No charges to date. Would I be upset over this if I was the family? Hell yes and did they do anything wrong yelling about that? Hell no. Would have done the same thing. But they were told that the crime lab reports take months and months sometimes. Should they have charged him. Probably yes but that MEANS NOTHING.
you left out a lot.. no surprises... how about
man kills UNARMED 17 year old kid.
police don't properly investigate
lead detective isn't permitted to file charges like he wanted to
the boy is left as a john doe for 3 days, even though the police could ID him. but is drug tested and alcohol tested.
accused, who was told there was no need for him to follow the kid, pursues anyway.
we don't know what happens next...
but we know the kid is dead and the accused is not injured and is able to walk into the police car... there is no blood on his clothing.
his clothing is not taken for forensic investigation
he is not examined forensically to ascertain if he showed any indication of having defended himself.
people like al sharpton, and the media, justifiably, expect the circumstances to be investigated....
they finally are.
charges are brought.. whcih may or may not be able to be substantiated due to failure of evidence gathering.
If someone followed and then chased me, I'd take action.
DickHead is a criminal
How many times do I have to point out that you are not allowed to attack someone because they ask you a question. You can just assert your 5th amendment rights & not reply.
Likewise you can't attack someone for following you or because they have a gun. Open carry guns is legal in Florida.
Except moron, the fact is documented that Zimmerman profiled, stalked, and chased Martin. All you have is "white advocate" speculation. I think you're nothing more than racist scum, who personally likes to see kids murdered because of their melanin content.
man kills UNARMED 17 year old kid.
police don't properly investigate
lead detective isn't permitted to file charges like he wanted to
the boy is left as a john doe for 3 days, even though the police could ID him. but is drug tested and alcohol tested.
accused, who was told there was no need for him to follow the kid, pursues anyway.
From what I have read Trayvon attacked Zimmerman before he was killed. If that account is accurate and I believe that it is, I would have also shot the guy.
From what I have read Trayvon attacked Zimmerman before he was killed. If that account is accurate and I believe that it is, I would have also shot the guy.
Unfortunately, the only account we have as to who assaulted who comes from the guy still standing, aka the shooter. Given the rest of what's come out, I look on that testimony as being highly suspicious. After all, if you'd shot an unarmed 17 year old kid after a struggle would you admit you started the fight? It's the difference between self-defense and at the very least a manslaughter charge.
I am trying hard to keep an open mind on this case, but it's awfully hard when the fact is a 17 year old unarmed kid ended up dead in the street. The fact that the initial investigation was, at best, haphazard does not help.
A kid going out at 7 pm to get a can of tea and some candy. A man with a background that never should have allowed him to have a concealed carry permit. The man follows the kid. The kid becomes aware of it, and is worried. The police advise the man to not make contact with the kid. And a couple of minutes later, the kid is dead. And we have only Zimmerman's words for what happened in those couple of minutes.
So, had Zimmerman not had a gun, the kid would be alive. Error #1, that Zimmerman was given the permit.
Had Zimmerman not followed the kid, the kid would be alive. As the article stated, what right did Zimmerman have to follow the kid? Why did he not simply advise the police and cease and desist?
Error #2
The Police told Zimmerman not to contact the kid. But Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and looked for the kid anyway. Error #3 on Zimmerman's part.
The kid went to the store for some tea and candy. Error #1
The kid did not run as fast as possible once he realized that he was being followed. Error #2
Since we still do not know what really took place at the confrontation, so we do not know errors were there.
Seems to me that based on the errors noted, that Zimmerman's were of a much more serious nature than those of the kid's.
While it sucks trayvon got shot. If he hadn't resorted to violence to solve his problem he would be alive today.
I know I for one would not attack someone for following me. I would have called the police...not my girlfriend.
Assuming he attacked Zimmerman.
We dont know yet.
Very true. If Martin asked Zimmerman a question, Zimmerman would not have any justification for attacking Martin. If Zimmerman asked Martin a question, Martin would not have any justification for attacking Zimmerman.
Also true.
However if they threatened you with a gun, then under Florida Statutes (784.011) that would be assault and you would be authorized to defend yourself statutes 776.012 (self defense) and 776.032 (commonly called the Stand Your Ground) provisions.
>>>>
Well there is absolutely no proof that Zimmerman started the attack by pulling his gun on Martin. Martins girlfriend did not hear anything about gun while on the phone with Martin & none of the other witnesses saw a gun heard anything about a gun until after the shot was fired.
Another fact that gets glossed over is that Martin was from a broken home. Children from broken homes are nine times more likely to commit a violent crime than others. Judging by Martin's school record, he was clearly on a downward spiral.
You're a pathetic fool. Are you one of David Duke's white advocates? There's ample evidence that Zimmerman stalked Martin, chased Martin, and planted a slug in the 17 year old's chest.
I guess you think that was a good thing. On the contrary, I think it shows a racist, nativist hate of what America stands for.
That may be true,but I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman just walked up to trayvon and shot him. And Zimmermans wounds support the hypothesis that trayvon attacked him.
Nor do we know what we would have thought if we were part of the Neighborhood Watch team in a neighborhood that had suffered a number of break ins and burglaries in recent weeks, and had seen a 6' something hooded person walking on a cold night in the rain. Would you consider that worth a second look? Or do 'good people' ignore all out-of-place or unlikely things until a crime is committed?
That may be true,but I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman just walked up to trayvon and shot him. And Zimmermans wounds support the hypothesis that trayvon attacked him.
No. Zimmerman's wounds show he was in a scuffle. Very different thing than being attacked.
Like I said, I'm trying to keep an open mind on this, and part of that is the fact that we only have one account of what happened that night: Zimmerman's. Keeping an open mind also requires questioning what he said too.
That may be true,but I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman just walked up to trayvon and shot him. And Zimmermans wounds support the hypothesis that trayvon attacked him.
No. Zimmerman's wounds show he was in a scuffle. Very different thing than being attacked.
Like I said, I'm trying to keep an open mind on this, and part of that is the fact that we only have one account of what happened that night: Zimmerman's. Keeping an open mind also requires questioning what he said too.
So you say he was in a scuffle? Now how would you know the difference between a scuffle and a fight? For all you know zimmerman defended himself to a point,and when he realized that trayvon meant to seriously harm him he pulled the gun.
Fact of the matter is zimmerman had a laceration on the back of his head and a broken or bloodied nose. Trayvon had zero wounds that would indicate zimmerman attacked him.
It's pretty clear trayvon tried to play the thug instead calling 911...and died for it.
No, actually it doesn't. It's possible that Zimmerman walked up to Martin, grabbed or attempted to restrain him, and ended up getting fought off. At which point he decided to shoot him.That may be true,but I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman just walked up to trayvon and shot him. And Zimmermans wounds support the hypothesis that trayvon attacked him.
No. Zimmerman's wounds show he was in a scuffle. Very different thing than being attacked.
Like I said, I'm trying to keep an open mind on this, and part of that is the fact that we only have one account of what happened that night: Zimmerman's. Keeping an open mind also requires questioning what he said too.
So you say he was in a scuffle? Now how would you know the difference between a scuffle and a fight? For all you know zimmerman defended himself to a point,and when he realized that trayvon meant to seriously harm him he pulled the gun.
Fact of the matter is zimmerman had a laceration on the back of his head and a broken or bloodied nose. Trayvon had zero wounds that would indicate zimmerman attacked him.
No, it actually isn't clear at all. It sounds to me like you're the one who made up his mind. For all we know Martin was going to call 911 next and was interrupted by Zimmerman. At this point WE DO NOT KNOW.It's pretty clear trayvon tried to play the thug instead calling 911...and died for it.
No, even that was is not clear unless we were there watching, and none of us were. Zimmerman may be as guilty as sin and deserve to spend the rest of his life in prison. Or he may be as innocent of murder as you and I and it happened exactly as he said. None of us were there. We don't know what happened.
No, even that was is not clear unless we were there watching, and none of us were. Zimmerman may be as guilty as sin and deserve to spend the rest of his life in prison. Or he may be as innocent of murder as you and I and it happened exactly as he said. None of us were there. We don't know what happened.
The way I see it, there's three possibilities:
1. Zimmerman thought a crime was imminent and that his physical presence on the scene might prevent it. He was confronted violently by Martin and feared for his life, justifiably using force. With a lack of police training, he ended up taking the kind of fatal action police are trained to avoid.
In this case Zimmerman is innocent by a self-defense ruling, but still should carry part of the blame publicly for putting himself in the situation when he should have backed off an called the cops.
2. Zimmerman thought a crime was imminent and decided to physically confront Martin, possibly seeking to restrain him physically until the cops arrived. A scuffle ensues where Zimmerman is injured, becomes afraid for his life, and fires the gun.
In this situation, Zimmerman should face at the very least manslaughter charges. If he initiated the situation with a 17 year old, as an adult he would face assault charges even if he lost the fight. Firing a gun to end a fight you started isn't self defense.
3. Something else entirely.
It's possible Zimmerman saw an opportunity to commit a hate crime and committed a pre-meditated race based murder. It is possible that Martin was out looking for trouble that night. There's literally all kinds of things that could have gone wrong or happened that night.
Except that Zimmerman did not observe a single crime being committed by Martin.
