How could Martin have pursued Zimmerman when Zimmerman was the one following and pursuing Martin? Not only do we have the response from the 911 operator telling Zimmerman not to confront Martin but we also have another witness who heard Martin asking Zimmerman why he was following him.As noted previously, Zimmerman claimed that Martin pursued and attacked him. The police and DA investigated and chose not to prosecute. It has since come to light that there was a witness who gave testimony that is consistent with Zimmerman’s story and inconsistent with the hypothesis that Martin was a “law-abiding” victim.
You would add to your credibility if you acknowledged these exculpatory facts.
There, fixed. Now there is no judgement.Quite judgmental of you.
I’ve stated the facts.
A law-abidingman with a gun followed a law-abiding young adult-]child/-] in the neighborhood. The young man then turned and followed the man. Then the young adult jumped the man
It came to be that the man with gun killed the young adult-]child/-].
Facts. Not judgment.
From what I understand Zimmerman was not the official watch person. He was a free agent doing his own thing.Zimmerman is half Hispanic and looks Hispanic and lives in the same gated community with Martin. When you listen to his calls he sounds scared. In the beginning, he says that Martin is looking at him and coming toward him, that he looks like he on drugs -,this is prior to him following him. Later you hear I believe Zimmerman screaming for help. Did he overstep his community watch - that will be up to them to decide. There are many of these groups - one of the biggest being the guardian angels that rode the subways of New York.
Very simply: Zimmerman followed Martin, confronted him, was satisfied, turned away and headed back to his car and as he did so was pursued by an enraged Martin.How could Martin have pursued Zimmerman when Zimmerman was the one following and pursuing Martin?
True enough. But the most relevant question is not why Zimmerman followed and confronted Martin against the advice of 911, we all agree that was a mistake, but whether Martin turned and attacked Zimmerman.Not only do we have the response from the 911 operator telling Zimmerman not to confront Martin but we also have another witness who heard Martin asking Zimmerman why he was following him.
Agree with you but there is more information I need.From my perspective:
Zimmerman calls police. Reports Martin.
Police ask if he is following Martin.
Zimmerman confirms. Police tell Zimmerman to STOP following him and that a unit is on the way.
Not only does Zimmerman continue following him, but gets out of his vehicle and confronts him.
This much we know: Zimmerman initiated the conflict after being told by police to stop. Had he not taken the law into his own hands, police would have resolved the issue without anyone losing their lives. But since Zimmerman couldn’t control himself, the result of his vigilantism is a young man dead.
He should be charged with manslaughter AT LEAST.
Case closed.
I appreciate your direct honesty even though I disagree. It is refreshing.My opinion, Zimmerman is a murderer, plain and simple.
You may have missed the revelation that there was a witness:See here for a legal discussion of lethal self-defense & the problems of only having the shooter’s testimony.
You don’t know that. From what the girlfriend has said it doesn’t sound that cut and dried.=Bubba Switzler;9106073]Very simply: Zimmerman followed Martin, confronted him, was satisfied, turned away and headed back to his car and as he did so was pursued by an enraged Martin.
Again don’t know that one but based on the history of both men I would say it’s was more likely Zimmerman that started it.True enough. But the most relevant question is not why Zimmerman followed and confronted Martin against the advice of 911, we all agree that was a mistake, but whether Martin turned and attacked Zimmerman.
Case Re-opnend.From my perspective:
Zimmerman calls police. Reports Martin.
Police ask if he is following Martin.
Zimmerman confirms. Police tell Zimmerman to STOP following him and that a unit is on the way.
Not only does Zimmerman continue following him, but gets out of his vehicle and confronts him.
This much we know: Zimmerman initiated the conflict after being told by police to stop. Had he not taken the law into his own hands, police would have resolved the issue without anyone losing their lives. But since Zimmerman couldn’t control himself, the result of his vigilantism is a young man dead.
He should be charged with manslaughter AT LEAST.
Case closed.
You asked how it was possible, that’s how. The girlfriend only testifies that Martin said he was being followed, which is not in dispute.You don’t know that. From what the girlfriend has said it doesn’t sound that cut and dried.
Neither had a violent history, from what has been made public so far. Zimmerman had a history of calling 911, which is consistent with his following and questioning Martin but not with an attack against Martin.Again don’t know that one but based on the history of both men I would say it’s was more likely Zimmerman that started it.
Actually I’d like to hear more about the “neighbor watch” angle.But we are also told that there were a rash of breaking and that after the initial confrontation that Zimmerman turns his back to go back to the SUV. and is jumped by Martin. Zimmerman is all bloodied from being beat up.
There are many of these neighborhood watch groups. There will be many more details that come out and possibly a grand jury.
I heard that there was another person also but that this group was a very loosely formed group - kind of if you have some time, go ahead and watch.originally** posted by Zabda**
From what I understand Zimmerman was not the official watch person. He was a free agent doing his own thing.
How can you call a child (T Martin) a Man?There, fixed. Now there is no judgement.
I called him a young adult. Which is what most people would call a 17 year old.How can you call a child (T Martin) a Man?
A child is a child - whether you approve or not.
ExactlyI called him a young adult. Which is what most people would call a 17 year old.
You are using the term “child” to invoke sympathy. It is the same reason news outlets are using the picture of him from when he was 12, instead of an up to date photo.
Go to a high school and ask all of the 17 year old students there if they are children or young adults. Do you really think they would answer “child?”
Perhaps call him a minor? He was close to 18 y.o., 6 ft 3" tall, a football player, and he beat up Zimmerman, according to the eyewitness.How can you call a child (T Martin) a Man?
A child is a child - whether you approve or not.
I called him a young adult. Which is what most people would call a 17 year old.
You are using the term “child” to invoke sympathy. It is the same reason news outlets are using the picture of him from when he was 12, instead of an up to date photo.
Go to a high school and ask all of the 17 year old students there if they are children or young adults. Do you really think they would answer “child?”
Silly me? No.Exactly
Wouldn’t he be called a “minor” by the law?Silly me? No.
The LAW says he’s a CHILD.
Ya’ know, the LAW?
I thought the law considered him an underage minor?Silly me? No.
The LAW says he’s a CHILD.
Ya’ know, the LAW?
Yep - a minor, a child.Wouldn’t he be called a “minor” by the law?