Trayvon Martin Case

[SolidSnake84]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

So a kid with tattoos and gold teeth is a gangster? Or a drugdealer? I'm pretty sure if this dude was a true gangster he wouldn't have had just iced tea and skittles on him right? I'm not saying he didn't do anything wrong in this case but in all fairness most 18 year old s want to act hard that's just the way it is in today's world.

The one website that was linked a few posts above paints a pretty good picture that Martin was into drugs or the drug scene. He also had problems at school. Keep in mind the website has credible news links to all stories. They hit gold when they found Martin's facebook and twitter.

He was suspended out of school for 10 days, later revealed to be from assulting a bus driver. There is a screen cap from Martin's twitter where Martin and someone else are talking about the incident.

There is also a facebook conversation posted from where someone was asking Martin where he was because "a ni**a needs a plant"

Friends of Treyvon took to twitter and facebook and posted photos of a rolled up blunt, along with a picture of treyvon. Not saying beating up a bus driver, selling weed, or smoking marijuana makes him a bad guy, but it does paint a drastically different scene than the 4 year old photos of a 13 year old angelic looking boy that the media has posted every where.

There is also a fox video where they have a witness that described the scene. Zimmerman was being beaten and held down by Martin allegedly, and they say that the screams on the 911 call was Zimmerman's own. Even the police say that when they found zimmerman, he was beaten, bloody, with a broken nose, a laceration on his head, and his clothes were wet with grass stains on them, indicating signs of a struggle. Also as some mentioned, Zimmerman was only 5'9 and was not in shape at the time of this fight. Martin was easily 6'3"" or bigger and weighed 200 pounds. An out of shape 5'9guy is never going to do very well against an in shape 17 year old who is 6'3" and 200 pounds..

I have a bad feeling there will never be resolution with this case, regardless of the verdict. too many unanswered questions, although it now looks like things are starting to become more clear on what may have happened that night.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

Zimmerman was only 5'9 and was not in shape at the time of this fight. Martin was easily 6'3"" or bigger and weighed 200 pounds. An out of shape 5'9guy is never going to do very well against an in shape 17 year old who is 6'3" and 200 pounds..

The stats I read earlier (which I now can't find) had Zimmerman weighing in at 200lbs and 5'9" and Trayvon Martin at 170lbs and 6'3".

This is starting to become more like the Duke Lacrosse witch hunt by every hour.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

The one website that was linked a few posts above paints a pretty good picture that Martin was into drugs or the drug scene. He also had problems at school. Keep in mind the website has credible news links to all stories. They hit gold when they found Martin's facebook and twitter.

He was suspended out of school for 10 days, later revealed to be from assulting a bus driver. There is a screen cap from Martin's twitter where Martin and someone else are talking about the incident.

There is also a facebook conversation posted from where someone was asking Martin where he was because "a ni**a needs a plant"

Friends of Treyvon took to twitter and facebook and posted photos of a rolled up blunt, along with a picture of treyvon. Not saying beating up a bus driver, selling weed, or smoking marijuana makes him a bad guy, but it does paint a drastically different scene than the 4 year old photos of a 13 year old angelic looking boy that the media has posted every where.

There is also a fox video where they have a witness that described the scene. Zimmerman was being beaten and held down by Martin allegedly, and they say that the screams on the 911 call was Zimmerman's own. Even the police say that when they found zimmerman, he was beaten, bloody, with a broken nose, a laceration on his head, and his clothes were wet with grass stains on them, indicating signs of a struggle. Also as some mentioned, Zimmerman was only 5'9 and was not in shape at the time of this fight. Martin was easily 6'3"" or bigger and weighed 200 pounds. An out of shape 5'9guy is never going to do very well against an in shape 17 year old who is 6'3" and 200 pounds..

I have a bad feeling there will never be resolution with this case, regardless of the verdict. too many unanswered questions, although it now looks like things are starting to become more clear on what may have happened that night.

I heard on CNN he was suspended for having a baggie that tested positive for holding marijuana.

And Zimmerman also had a domestic abuse charge from beating up an ex-girlfriend.

This whole thing is such a pendulum, swinging back and forth from who seems like the most innocent party. As details emerge I don't think either of these guys were wrapped too tight.

Still not convinced Martin was a thug, just a kid that likes to smoke marijuana... A lot. And I don't think Zimmerman is a racist either, but I do still think he's a nut.

[JoeRedskin]

Okay, so why is it inflammatory if a white person shoots a black teenager under suspicious circumstances but not inflammatory if a Hispanic individual shoots a black teenager under suspicious circumstances? Explain to me why this is not base hypocracy or demagougery.

It's between two minorities? So minorities can shoot each other and society won't bring out the pitchforks, only white folks have to answer to the mob? This doesn't strike you as wrong? A young man is dead - If unjustified, shouldn't outrage flow regardless of who shot him or the colors involved?

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

So minorities can shoot each other and society won't bring out the pitchforks, only white folks have to answer to the mob?

So it would appear, yes.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Okay, so why is it inflammatory if a white person shoots a black teenager under suspicious circumstances but not inflammatory if a Hispanic individual shoots a black teenager under suspicious circumstances? Explain to me why this is not base hypocracy or demagougery.

It's between two minorities? So minorities can shoot each other and society won't bring out the pitchforks, only white folks have to answer to the mob? This doesn't strike you as wrong? A young man is dead - If unjustified, shouldn't outrage flow regardless of who shot him or the colors involved?

I think it's the idea that people think minorities need to band together against white people because they're looking out for their own, so minorities have to look after their own. Its an archaic idea but it seems those ideas die hard.

I mean, I just read an article on how some white kids, aged 16-21 were bummed out when they found out certain characters from The Hunger Games were black. I mean really? Someone outright said they felt no pity for those characters anymore.

It seems like minority crimes get swept under the rug. It's just kind of like, "eh shit happens." Minority on minority crime doesn't cause outrage, but if its white on black or vice versa, everyone's ready to stage a protest and cry racism.

In my opinion, its all incredibly sad.

I strongly hope and want to believe that we're still making strides in race relations where there ARE no barriers and people want justice because a young man died, but cases like this, where it seems like people are trying to inject race into it and the example I gave makes me think there's still a long, long way to go.

[budw38]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Okay, so why is it inflammatory if a white person shoots a black teenager under suspicious circumstances but not inflammatory if a Hispanic individual shoots a black teenager under suspicious circumstances? Explain to me why this is not base hypocracy or demagougery.

It's between two minorities? So minorities can shoot each other and society won't bring out the pitchforks, only white folks have to answer to the mob? This doesn't strike you as wrong? A young man is dead - If unjustified, shouldn't outrage flow regardless of who shot him or the colors involved?

Unfortunately yes . No different than a "pretty " white girl is missing or feared dead , the media goes crazy and it is a national story . However it seems like we never hear about Black or latino girls missing . If Zimmerman were black , we would have never heard about it . Here is a violent crime where some black teens set a white kid on fire , how many people have heard this story ? Teens set kid on fire for being 'white boy' - New York Daily News

[SolidSnake84]

It took me a long time to read through the whole website:

Was Trayvon Martin a Drug Dealer? | a12iggymom's Blog

But I encourage everyone to. It isn't conjecture or speculation, it is all news and photo evidence pieced together. The twitter conversations and myspace photos all show a totally different guy than what the media wants you to think. Not saying that stuff should have cost him his life, but now witnesses are coming forward and all signs point to Martin being the aggressor.

I was also very saddened to hear that Martin's mother is now copyrighting slogans about Trayvon so that they can sell DVDs and CDs about the tragedy. Again this is not speculation this is a statement coming straight from the Martin family attorney. So it looks to me like they are going to try and make some money off it. Very sickening.

It is like the duke university witch hunt. More and more crap coming out by the minute...

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

It took me a long time to read through the whole website:

Was Trayvon Martin a Drug Dealer? | a12iggymom's Blog

But I encourage everyone to. It isn't conjecture or speculation, it is all news and photo evidence pieced together. The twitter conversations and myspace photos all show a totally different guy than what the media wants you to think. Not saying that stuff should have cost him his life, but now witnesses are coming forward and all signs point to Martin being the aggressor.

I was also very saddened to hear that Martin's mother is now copyrighting slogans about Trayvon so that they can sell DVDs and CDs about the tragedy. Again this is not speculation this is a statement coming straight from the Martin family attorney. So it looks to me like they are going to try and make some money off it. Very sickening.

It is like the duke university witch hunt. More and more crap coming out by the minute...

The first thing on that page says on a conservative note, and of you read more than one sentence you can tell there is an agenda. Terrible article, by that sites judgement I would be classified as a thug since I have an arm full of tattoos and a checkered past. I'm not going to call a 17 year old kid a gang Banger because he has a few tattoos and has experimented with drugs.

The fact is the police said so not pursue, he pursued and a conflict occurred. Had he not pursued this would not be an issue. And if the stand your ground law didn't exist Zimmerman would be in jail. IMO Zimmerman is guilty of at a minimum manslaughter and should serve years in jail, but due to this terrible law he may never see a jail cell. If anything hopefully this law gets repelled in every state. From what I understand you could pick a fight with someone, start losing that fight, pull out a gun and shoot the person. Such a joke.

And as far as his family trying to copyright things to try and make money. Take a step back and think about how much money this is costing the family to pursue legal action as well as organize protests. And who's to say if she did not copyright these things that someone else might be out there making money off her sons death. She could also start a foundation with proceeds as well. I'd wait a second before I said she was trying to profit from her sons death though.

[NC_Skins]

Wonder if Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton regret jumping the gun on this like they did with the Duke rape case?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

The first thing on that page says on a conservative note, and of you read more than one sentence you can tell there is an agenda. Terrible article, by that sites judgement I would be classified as a thug since I have an arm full of tattoos and a checkered past. I'm not going to call a 17 year old kid a gang Banger because he has a few tattoos and has experimented with drugs.

The fact is the police said so not pursue, he pursued and a conflict occurred. Had he not pursued this would not be an issue. And if the stand your ground law didn't exist Zimmerman would be in jail. IMO Zimmerman is guilty of at a minimum manslaughter and should serve years in jail, but due to this terrible law he may never see a jail cell. If anything hopefully this law gets repelled in every state. From what I understand you could pick a fight with someone, start losing that fight, pull out a gun and shoot the person. Such a joke.

And as far as his family trying to copyright things to try and make money. Take a step back and think about how much money this is costing the family to pursue legal action as well as organize protests. And who's to say if she did not copyright these things that someone else might be out there making money off her sons death. She could also start a foundation with proceeds as well. I'd wait a second before I said she was trying to profit from her sons death though.

First of the dispatcher told him not to pursue and they are not police. Second when he was told not to pursue he said (OK) what evidence do you have that says he kept pursuing the kid?

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by firstdown

First of the dispatcher told him not to pursue and they are not police. Second when he was told not to pursue he said (OK) what evidence do you have that says he kept pursuing the kid?

When you could still hear him running and breathing heavy in the audio tape.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

When you could still hear him running and breathing heavy in the audio tape.

So that couldn't *possibly* have been him going back to his SUV?

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

The fact is the police said so not pursue, he pursued and a conflict occurred. Had he not pursued this would not be an issue. And if the stand your ground law didn't exist Zimmerman would be in jail. IMO Zimmerman is guilty of at a minimum manslaughter and should serve years in jail, but due to this terrible law he may never see a jail cell. If anything hopefully this law gets repelled in every state. From what I understand you could pick a fight with someone, start losing that fight, pull out a gun and shoot the person. Such a joke.

A dispatcher, who happened to be a police officer, said "We dont need you to do that" in regards to Zimmerman indicating that he was following Martin. Thats a little different than a police officer telling Zimmerman not to pursue.

Zimmerman 911 Call Transcript – Trayvon Martin « Phoebe's Detention Room

I dont think Zimmerman had any idea that the dispatcher was a police officer. Also i think i heard FL law (maybe federal) says you dont have to adhere to anything your told over the phone from a police officer, 911 dispatcher, or anyone else. Its all advice, nothing official. Perhaps thats why the dispatcher said "we dont need you to do that" as opposed a command like "do not do that". Regardless, it seems by all accounts Zimmerman stopped following Martin at the advice of the dispatcher. Unfortunately the media usually ends the recording prematurely and makes it sounds like Zimmerman kept going after Martin.

The trouble i have in siding with Zimmerman is that he got out of his truck and followed Martin in the first place, when there was no reason to believe Martin had yet committed a crime, and more specifically a crime against Zimmerman or his family.

I was a victim of violent crime and one surprising thing i learned is that preceding separate acts cant be used against you. The example is if you see someone driving recklessly, then they leave your sights, and moments later you see that car involved in an accident, your previous account of them driving recklessly cant be used against them. The thought is you have no idea if they stopped speeding or driving recklessly immediately before the accident.

So they law may see what happened as 2 separate acts.

1) Zimmerman got out of his truck to follow Martin. At this point if he had encountered Martin and the result was the same, I fully believe Zimmerman would be guilty of manslaughter at a very minimum and deserves to spend time in jail. But he didn’t encounter Martin at this point and more importantly when told to stop he stopped. And he stopped long enough to give the dispatcher his information so that police could assist him. And according to Zimmerman he retreated to his suv.

Then:

2) Zimmerman was walking to his SUV and was confronted by Martin from behind and after they exchanged words Martin punched Zimmerman in the face breaking his noise and took him the ground and was slamming his head against the sidewalk. In the struggle and while under an reasonable impression that Martin had a gun or weaon he shot Martin in the chest.

So I think what people need to consider is; was Zimmerman acting in self defense specifically in the context of JUST the 2nd scenario. Sure I personally feel, like most of you probably do, that if not for Zimmerman getting out of his suv Martin would be alive, therefore Zimmerman was in the wrong and provoked the actions of Martin. But as wrong as Zimmerman was to get out of his car, he did stop and retreated at which point Zimmerman would be justified more so to defend himself when attacked.

* This is based off of Zimmerman’s accounts which obviously may be false. But it does match up with his injuries and the accounts of some witnesses. Im just going off of reported information. Also this is my understanding of law, which makes it completely worthless….

Something else that I think will be a legal issue is the girlfriend’s account on the phone. It gets into that whole hearsay issue. I learned that you generally (its tricky) cant reveal something someone told you. So if a witness called 911 because her husband told her to because one guy just shot another guy outside, she cant say that. There may be precedent to phone conversation, but the girlfriend may only be limited to describing what she heard but not what was said.

Also the gated community thing might complicated things further. I believe it becomes a little fuzzy about what is/isn’t considered his homestead. That combined with the knowledge he likely picked up as a neighborhood watchman of who does/doesn’t live within the restricted community and their common visitors may give him more rights in approaching a visitor of the neighborhood.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Also the gated community thing might complicated things further. I believe it becomes a little fuzzy about what is/isn’t considered his homestead.

This is a critical point, IMO. Why was the kid even in there if he wasn't a residence and what's the rate of occurrence for kids hopping the fence and causing issues?

This isn't the case we were presented with initially and further underlines why we need to do due diligence and leave the burning brands and pitchforks for later.