Don't know....maybe the phone call to 911 saying that he looks like he's on something, that "they always get away" and of course the F'ing coon bomb pretty wrapped it up for me that Zimmerman had a race issue. Also the 50+ calls to 911 about black people looking suspicious when the majority were bogus. Now I did hear that there were break in’s in that community from that other watchman but don't know if it's true. If it was true and the culprits were young black men, then I can understand the tension.....BUT it doesn't justify killing this kid. He was innocent and I don't care about the hypothetical notions one can muster up. I don't see a situation where Zimmerman was attacked because he had the "right' to approach Martin. All i see is logic....I live in the real world. He pursued a person of interest to him because he believed that Martin was a criminal with intent. He followed him....chased him and then cornered him. If someone I didn't know did that to me or anyone, a NATURAL instinct would be to DEFEND yourself especially if the only thing you did wrong was going to corner store to get snacks. Even if that kid attacked Zimmerman; he did so to defend himself from what he perceived HARM. There is no excuse for Zimmerman, his ass needs to go. For anyone to thing that kid just attacked Zimmerman for no reason isn't smart. Zimmerman brought the fight and delivered death. I believe an eye for an eye.
Well when everyone thought he was white that was sure a big part of the story. Now that he turns out to be "latino" according to CNN, you don't think it should be mentioned?
I was responding to Rocket River's hypothetical scenario where he basically was asking if the way to get away with murder is to make it so no one knows what happens.
That could happen, but from my previous post you see that at one point Zimmerman was on top of Martin, so another scenario is this. Zimmerman physically overcomes Martin, pinning him on the ground. Martin does all he can and gets Zimmerman off of him, injuring Zimmerman in the process and pushes Zimmerman off, creating a distance between the two as Martin rolls away from him. They both stand up and that's when Zimmerman thinks he has enough to get away with a self defense and decides to shoot Martin.
Luckily I don't think anyone is saying this. You live in the wrong country if you want your justice system to be based on "eye for an eye."
Absolutely this scenario is possible. That's why I'm not ruling out that it is actually murder. I'm glad someone has taken the case and is investigating it beyond the initial police department. It very well may be that this was a case of a racist, overzealous community watch guy who attacked and murdered a young man in cold blood. I just don't think we know that for sure yet and we should accept that possibility.
Ok buddy, replace court system with legal system where this case is. The answer is still yes, if you commit a crime where there is no proof you committed it you get to get away with it unless you confess. That's a side effect of "innocent until proven guilty." It's a pesky loophole in America it appears when people don't like someone getting off for something they are convinced they did, despite not witnessing it themselves or seeing all the evidence.
If someone provkes someone else to act in self-defense, then kills that person (especially after we hear racial remarks and slurs), I think that's cold-blood. I think it's very obvious that Zimmerman was the provoker here.
I understand where you're coming from, because I thought about your scenario too. But I just feel like with all the other witness accounts that scenario isn't as likely. Cause I feel like if you're going for another person's gun, it's before he even fires a warning shot. Plus that lengthy pause between those two shots goes against the scenario of somebody going for the gun. If they're struggling for the gun I feel like the shots would be in rapid succession of each other (kind of like in the movies but more realistic). What I would like to know is the distance between Zimmerman and Martin and whether they were both standing when Martin was shot. Because if Martin was on the ground and Zimmerman fired it downwards into Martin's chest both our scenarios would be extremely probable (Martin going for Zimmerman's gun while Zimmerman has Martin pinned, or Martin injuring Zimmerman and Zimmerman pulls the gun out and shoots him).
I did find how Zimmerman became a white hispanic to be interesting. When I saw a picture of him in the beginning, I thought he looked hispanic, but he had a Jewish name so I was a bit confused about it all. If you aren't looking for something nefarious about it though, you could say it's just the media correcting bad information. For Zimmerman to be acting in self-defense, Martin would have to be committing some sort of crime against him. But, no one can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Martin was committing any crime, so how can self-defense be invoked? The rest of it -- that Zimmerman pulled the trigger and shot Martin -- can be proved definitively.
The law has nuance to it. I'm sorry if you don't like that. If no charges come at all I will join in the outrage. Until then I am glad higher powers are investigating and determining a course of action. I think we'll learn more now that more interested parties are investigating. After they get to the bottom of the evidence we'll see what comes of it.
The new evidence of Martin's girlfriend verifiying that Martin was trying to flee from Zimmerman and the 911 call of Zimmerman losing sight of Martin only to hunt him down again on foot (which 100% contradicts the statement given to the media by Zimmerman's dad) should dispel probable cause that Zimmerman acted in self defense. IT DOES NOT MAKE ZIMMERMAN GUILTY, but at least this thing can go to court where it belongs.
I'm not arguing self defense for Zimmerman Juan. I think he is wrong, absolutely. What level that amounts to criminally is the only thing I'm not sure of. Adding your quote to my post so I can echo it. I don't think there is any chance this is self defense and I'm sorry if anyone misunderstood me to be arguing that.
Well you see the questions I have can easily be determined through forensics (photos, where the bullets are etc). But the thing is with Sanford police department and how they've handled the case so far, I bet they could even tamper with the crime scene.
I understand that and, honestly, I have no idea what the actual charge would be. Just saying if I was in charge and someone with a gun provoked an unarmed man and then ended up shooting the provokee (is that a word?), I'd make that a first-degree murder charge.
You are not a racist, and I agree with your position justtxyank. There have been a number of assumptions made in this thread. The DOJ is investigating the matter, lets see what happens.
