Defense posts George Zimmerman photo from night of Trayvon Martin shooting

[rorydaman]

Actually, what you said right there is accurate. Zimmerman saw this kid who looked like a gang member in his dress (we’ve got plenty of them where I live, you can tell who they are just by the clothes, hoodies, and the way they look around) and Zimmerman chose to see what the kid was doing.

911 advised him NOT to follow Martin precisely because that is the only answer they can legally give. It is legally the police’s job to do these kind of things.

Zimmerman knew this, so although they advised him not to follow, he did, because he could see that the kid was acting strange.

The rest of the story fell out as it is.

So Zimmerman aggressively confronted what he thought was a gang member, knowing that he had a gun on him for protection, got beat up, and shot a child. And Zimmerman is innocent?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I have a feeling your “reliable” source will be a right wing political blog.

This is precisely the problem with people who speculate.

 

[dshix]

Zimmerman confronted Martin. If Zimmerman didn’t confront him in a threatening way he wouldn’t have gotten beaten up and Martin wouldn’t be dead. And to be honest I don’t think that getting beaten up is reason enough to shoot a child.

The bolded is your assumption and not a fact; if you make that assumption it changes the story.

Furthermore, Martin was actually taller than Zimmerman (if I remember correctly) and his attack was by no means a light one.

 

[qui_est_ce]

The bolded is your assumption and not a fact; if you make that assumption it changes the story.

Furthermore, Martin was actually taller than Zimmerman (if I remember correctly) and his attack was by no means a light one.

Martin was on the football team.

 

[rorydaman]

The bolded is your assumption and not a fact; if you make that assumption it changes the story.

Furthermore, Martin was actually taller than Zimmerman (if I remember correctly) and his attack was by no means a light one.

Bottom line is that Zimmerman approached Martin when 911 told him not to. He started the confrontation. You really think that if you are following someone that looks suspicious while on the phone with 911 you aren’t going to approach them aggressively? You think if Zimmerman went up to the kid nicely and said “hey, how are you doing. My name is George and I am on the neighborhood watch here. I didn’t recognize you and were just wondering what you were doing in the neighborhood” that Martin would have fought him? Of course not.

If you are chasing someone down on the phone with 911 and decide to approach them you are going to do it aggressively.

 

[scipio337]

Why don’t you post a reliable source then because every source I have read said that Zimmerman was on the phone with 911, said he was pursuing martin for looking suspicious, 911 told him not to pursue him, he did anyway, and thats when the fight happened.

I have a feeling your “reliable” source will be a right wing political blog.

Following, or “pursuit” is not a crime, nor is not listening to the advice of a 911 dispatcher (not a police officer, just saying).

At some point while Zimmerman was out of his car, either Zimmerman initiated a physical altercation with Martin, or Martin initiated one with Zimmerman.

The person who initiated the physical altercation is the guilty party. Either Zimmerman acted with deadly force in fear for his life, or is guilty of at least manslaughter.

Your “grown man got beat up by a high schooler” is pretty childish. A person is dead, and two families’ lives are ruined.

 

[ExCatholicGuy]

Actually, what you said right there is accurate. Zimmerman saw this kid who looked like a gang member in his dress (we’ve got plenty of them where I live, you can tell who they are just by the clothes, hoodies, and the way they look around) and Zimmerman chose to see what the kid was doing.

911 advised him NOT to follow Martin precisely because that is the only answer they can legally give. It is legally the police’s job to do these kind of things.

Zimmerman knew this, so although they advised him not to follow, he did, because he could see that the kid was acting strange.

The rest of the story fell out as it is.

One thing’s for sure - Zimmerman is an idiot! What did he expect to accomplish by following Martin on foot that he couldn’t have done by simply observing from the safety of his car?

 

[rorydaman]

Following, or “pursuit” is not a crime, nor is not listening to the advice of a 911 dispatcher (not a police officer, just saying).

At some point while Zimmerman was out of his car, either Zimmerman initiated a physical altercation with Martin, or Martin initiated one with Zimmerman.

The person who initiated the physical altercation is the guilty party. Either Zimmerman acted with deadly force in fear for his life, or is guilty of at least manslaughter.

Your “grown man got beat up by a high schooler” is pretty childish. A person is dead, and two families’ lives are ruined.

A person is dead because the grown man approached Martin aggressively. There is no way that the fight wouldn’t have started if Martin didn’t approach Trayvon aggressively and there is no way that someone on the phone with 911 pursuing someone “suspicious” would not be aggressive in their approach.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Bottom line is that Zimmerman approached Martin when 911 told him not to.

Actually, 911 told him not to follow Martin AFTER Zimmerman told them he was following. Zimmerman responded “OK” and returned to his truck.

He started the confrontation. You really think that if you are following someone that looks suspicious while on the phone with 911 you aren’t going to approach them aggressively? You think if Zimmerman went up to the kid nicely and said “hey, how are you doing. My name is George and I am on the neighborhood watch here. I didn’t recognize you and were just wondering what you were doing in the neighborhood” that Martin would have fought him? Of course not.

Where you there? How do you know this?

If you are chasing someone down on the phone with 911 and decide to approach them you are going to do it aggressively.

I’m glad you’re not the prosecutor in. We have to go on facts, not speculation.

 

[dshix]

A person is dead because the grown man approached Martin aggressively. There is no way that the fight wouldn’t have started if **Martin didn’t approach Trayvon aggressively **and there is no way that someone on the phone with 911 pursuing someone “suspicious” would not be aggressive in their approach.

All three phrases I bolded are assumptions on your part. Stop making assumptions.

Oh, and I assume you meant “Zimmerman didn’t approach Trayvon”

 

[qui_est_ce]

A person is dead because the grown man approached Martin aggressively. There is no way that the fight wouldn’t have started if Martin didn’t approach Trayvon aggressively and there is no way that someone on the phone with 911 pursuing someone “suspicious” would not be aggressive in their approach.

I heard Martin approached Zimmerman as he was getting back into his truck. But then, I wasn’t there.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Why don’t you post a reliable source then because every source I have read said that Zimmerman was on the phone with 911, said he was pursuing martin for looking suspicious, 911 told him not to pursue him, he did anyway, and thats when the fight happened.

I have a feeling your “reliable” source will be a right wing political blog.

Thats correct.

The problem with the “Stand Your Ground,” law is that a person can set up a situation where they can pull their gun and kill the opponent with the alibi that it was self-defense.

Jim

 

[dshix]

Thats correct.

The problem with the “Stand Your Ground,” law is that a person can set up a situation where they can pull their gun and kill the opponent with the alibi that it was self-defense.

Jim

That is another assumption. You cannot assume Zimmerman’s motives.

Man oh man, a lot of assumptions around this issue!

 

[qui_est_ce]

That is another assumption. You cannot assume Zimmerman’s motives.

Man oh man, a lot of assumptions around this issue!

It is worrisome.

 

[ExCatholicGuy]

That is another assumption. You cannot assume Zimmerman’s motives.

Man oh man, a lot of assumptions around this issue!

He didn’t express an assumption - he simply stated what could be done under the law.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Thats correct.

Which part of this quote is correct?

Originally Posted by rorydaman View Post
Why don’t you post a reliable source then because every source I have read said that Zimmerman was on the phone with 911, said he was pursuing martin for looking suspicious, 911 told him not to pursue him, he did anyway, and thats when the fight happened.

or

I have a feeling your “reliable” source will be a right wing political blog.

Jim:

The problem with the “Stand Your Ground,” law is that a person can set up a situation where they can pull their gun and kill the opponent with the alibi that it was self-defense.

Jim

Do you have evidence that this is what Mr. Zimmerman was doing?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

That is another assumption. You cannot assume Zimmerman’s motives.

Man oh man, a lot of assumptions around this issue!

I didn’t mention anything about Zimmerman’s motives.

However, it’s clear that the Police Dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow the suspect and he ignored him and followed anyway, getting into a fight and in a position where he could use the “Stand Your Ground,” law and kill Trever Martin.

Jim

 

[dshix]

He didn’t express an assumption - he simply stated what could be done under the law.

I don’t like to be contradictory for no reason, but the context and way that he said what he said was obviously an assumption. If he wasn’t making an assumption, he’d have worded it differently.

 

[dshix]

I didn’t mention anything about Zimmerman’s motives.

However, it’s clear that the Police Dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow the suspect and he ignored him and followed anyway, getting into a fight and in a position where he could use the “Stand Your Ground,” law and kill Trever Martin.

Jim

I suppose. It’s a possibility. But there’s no proof.

 

[ExCatholicGuy]

I don’t like to be contradictory for no reason, but the context and way that he said what he said was obviously an assumption. If he wasn’t making an assumption, he’d have worded it differently.

You have the right to make that assumption, of course.