The cops may have looked at GZ’s face and condition, listened to the eyewitness and saw self defense. I guess some people just believe no matter what that GZ walked right up to TM and shot him mob style in the back of the head . Doesn’t fit.
True as well.
I personally have never thought that, Johnny.
I agree that it doesn’t make a lot of sense. On the other hand, why would Trayvon initiate aggression?
I agree that it doesn’t make a lot of sense. On the other hand, why would Trayvon initiate aggression?
I don’t feel like it makes sense that either attacked the other based on the evidence that’s been leaked out. That said, odder things have happened.
That’s what I’ve been wondering and stating here.
Yes , this should be investigated intensely. Too many hands is not good either though. A special prosecutor and a grand jury to settle it. That’s how the law works. I don’t lean towards Zimmerman, I lean towards facts and common sense. Zimmerman may be as guilty as you no what, but there is just not enough knowledge yet to say GZ just pulled the trigger for no reason. Thats the crux of the case, motive. I don’t see premeditation to commit murder. That will have to be proven.
Right, he said “OK”. But to assume that GZ did more than what he said is wrong to.Following his logic and the fact that perception CAN be subjective, though…that is what YOU interpret the “OK” as. We don’t know what Ole Zimmie meant by “OK.” Open to a lot of speculations and interpretations. Unfortunately.
And what he did immediately after saying “OK.” There needs to be rechecking and verification of that. What DID he mean by “OK?”
Thing is, I agree with EasterJoy. This is so convlouted and subjective we will probably never know.
Not circularity------just allowing to for the subjectivity of the interpretation and looking at it from ALL POVs.
What makes matters worse is that our minds have this urge (instinct?) to fill in gaps with conjecture, and clearly that doesn’t help.That’s what I’ve been wondering and stating here.
OTOH------like you said, odder things have happened.
Who knows, ultimately. Weeeeeeird.
You know, I agree with you-------whatever happened, this was NOT premeditated. And I don’t think most of the people involved (including the Martin family) are implying that.
Good point. If Z kept following M, as M’s girlfriend claims, how the heck did they get back to Z’s truck?
So, if this account is not a true testimony given to police, that makes it practically useless. I would want to hear what she said to police, not what she said to Martin’s family lawyer.
Good point. But maybe like T. Brawley and the Duke lacross cases we will find out over a period of years. Unfortunately by then the damage is done.What makes matters worse is that our minds have this urge (instinct?) to fill in gaps with conjecture, and clearly that doesn’t help.
It’s entirely possible that we may never know the answer, regarding why aggression was really initiated.
That would be horrible-----not for me and others, but for the Martin family.What makes matters worse is that our minds have this urge (instinct?) to fill in gaps with conjecture, and clearly that doesn’t help.
It’s entirely possible that we may never know the answer, regarding why aggression was really initiated.
ok means he’s agreeable to what is being said to him. it’s pretty plain english. now if you want to say that he conveyed that he was agreeing with the dispatcher and then went ahead and did the the opposite of what he agreed that is another thing, but where’s your proof. you never got back to the first question i asked you.Following his logic and the fact that perception CAN be subjective, though…that is what YOU interpret the “OK” as. We don’t know what **Ole Zimmie **meant by “OK.” Open to a lot of speculations and interpretations. Unfortunately.
And what he did immediately after saying “OK.” There needs to be rechecking and verification of that. What DID he mean by “OK?”
Thing is, I agree with EasterJoy. This is so convlouted and subjective we will probably never know.
Not circularity------just allowing to for the subjectivity of the interpretation and looking at it from ALL POVs.
Don’t you think there’s a good chance she’d be biased in her account?
Contrast this to the 13-year old Allen Coon’s case in Kansas City. The boy was attacked on the porch of his home as he was coming home from school, was doused with gasoline, and set on fire. That was clearly a pre-meditated attack, yet the public’s attention is captivated by the Trayvon Martin case, and not many people are paying attention to the vicious, hate-motivated events that took place in Kansas City.
Another reason not to rush to prosecute… there’s no statute of limitations:
Any “proof” that comes of this will be found out by the DA assigned to the case. I’m sure she will be be thorough.
As you probably know the rush to judgement has begun. Enter -Al Sharpton, New Black Panthers, Spike Lee. It’s a mess.
Spike Lee should be sued for what did to that poor couple-----who are now being basically forced to move by his irresponsible, all-out-stupid texting actions.
