Unless the attempt in doing so is utterly misguided. You've said that it's not illegal to follow someone, but it IS provocation. There is quite obviously a valid argument that Zimmerman was recklessly indifferent in his pursuit of Martin, and as an armed & willing individual, presented an unjustifiably high risk to a human life. There are also inconsistencies with the timeline of events as he described them. That said, second degree murder is a sensational charge for something that, under normal circumstances, would most likely be a form of involuntary manslaughter. Voluntary manslaughter at the very most, but even that would need some evidence of malicious intent by Zimmerman as opposed to harassment. If Zimmerman just walks, it's on the prosecution for getting carried away. The fact is, both of these individuals made poor decisions that ended in tragedy. NEITHER of them are solely at fault, and they both guilty of escalating the events of an avoidable situation. There are a lot of people out there willing to assume various subjective details are fact in order to get their pound of flesh in the name of "justice." In my eyes, the evidence available makes case for criminally negligent homicide. Pursuing someone without cause is harassment. It's not unreasonable to say Zimmerman should have known that he was provoking a potentially lethal confrontation by harassing someone while armed. However, the first crime committed was an assault that Zimmerman provoked. I'm not sure of precedent, but 5-10 years w/ an opportunity for parole seems like a fair sentence for a misguided Guardian Angel wannabe.
Misinformed? I've been following this story since he died on February 2012. I know everything about this story. And personal belief? What personal belief? You're telling me that if a stranger is following you, you would do nothing? Were you raised by a family of females by any chance?
Since your unable to answer the questions about whether or not GZ was following the standards and procedures for neighborhood watch in which he was trained says plenty. Thank you for surrendering the point.
Zimmerman killed Martin, but did not murder him. Justice is out there, it's on the prosecution to get it right.
Saying he had a right to assault someone for following him is fairly personal. Assuming the worst and reacting as such is not justifiable. Its equally paranoid as Zimmerman was following him, only assault is a more actionable offense than harassment.
I agree with most of this except that I don't feel it has been proven that GZ provoked TM. They both could have done things differently that night.
It goes to his state of mind and how far stand your ground extends. It is sad that you lack the critical thinking skills to see that. Also, I never said who started the altercation. I stated, and it remains true, that GZ had the best opportunity to avoid an altercation. Had he not decided to follow Martin around, there would not have been an altercation to be had. I also never said that the only reason he followed Martin as that he was armed. However, if you think that his being armed did not embolden him in any way, then you just aren't very bright. The logical errors and holes in my post are wholly created by you. If you had responded to what I actually posted rather an what you wish I had posted, then your assertions would make a lot less sense. *guffaw*
Following a person without stating some sort of intent isnt illegal, but its provocative in almost any society. Its the same kind of "worst case scenario" reactive behavior that both individuals displayed by alternatingly escalating a situation. A situation that started with an unfounded assumption that multiple unrelated events were somehow connected. If at any point, either of them stopped to make a reasonable decision, they would have gone on with their lives. Instead, they just made reactive decisions based on various biased assumptions.
Let's be honest, you've done this a few times in this thread as well. Also, let's quit using the word right. There is nothing guaranteeing anybody the right to follow somebody. What he did was not illegal but it doesn't mean he has the right to do it.
As a neighborhood watch volunteer, GZ responded to seemingly aimless behavior of a stranger in a neighborhood plagued by burglaries. If he had ignored that "responsibility," yes he could have avoided this confrontation. The more "intense" effort to locate Martin occurred when Martin had made an effort to ditch GZ-- which is highly suspicious in and of itself from GZ's persepctive. If GZ was so "on the hunt" why did he not pull out the gun much sooner and seize the advantage that you so constantly emphasize he knew he had?
You're using a loaded word (right) to make it seem like there is some Constitutional amendment protecting his following of Martin. There is no right to follow like there is a right to bear arms.
I think he's saying, while it is legal, it doesn't make it right or a good thing to do. People throw fits over aborting babies, but it is legal so you can do it.
This is how race plays into this. its perferctly all right for Zimmerman to follow a kid with a loaded weapon but its not okay for a kid to be suspicious of someone following him a white guy with no authority ? What was Martin supposed to do?
Of course it was okay for Martin to be concerned. That is only natural. I would be and so would you. Martin did not know that Zimmerman had no authority. I said a couple of hundred pages ago that Martin should have just knocked on the nearest door and asked for help. If people won't open the door ask them to call the cops because "some guy is following me." In virtually all cases, those people would call the cops if not for Martin then for their own protection. Please clarify your insertion of race again into this discussion.
so you think Zimmerman would have been okay with Martin just knocking on some random door . how was Martin supposed to know anything about Zimmerman ?
I am trained for neighborhood watch... and what we are trained to do is to look for suspicious activity and then call the police. We are trained to NOT follow or confront. We are trained to NOT carry a weapon. It was also already posted what Sanford's neighborhood watch program trains... which agrees with how I was trained. Zimmerman clearly went outside that training. Funny how the right wing has gone from "law and order" to "what the definition of is is" approach to all this. If Zimmerman gets off, er is acquitted of the charges, it will be the right wing belief that "well, Zimmerman was within his rights to follow, confront and kill Martin..." or "well, if the prosecution had charged him differently..." or "well, its all the media's fault...". Whatever... Zimmerman killed Martin, and justice was not served.
I never said that Martin was supposed to know anything about Zimmerman; it was you that said Martin ("a white guy with no authority") knew something about Zimmerman. Going up and knocking on a door looks purposeful. Anytime you are in trouble like this, you try to find "company."
