The problem what you described as having happened is far from proven. There is evidence that Zimmerman wasn't walking back to his vehicle and got blindsided. If you've decided that's what you want to believe that's fine. But don't act like it's a settled fact in this case. It's also more than likely the calls on the 911 tape were not from Zimmerman. But if you'd like to go ahead and decide that's who the calls are from, you can. But again, don't act like it's a settled fact. It is true that if you only believe Zimmerman's side of the story and ignore the other witnesses, evidence, and experts who have cast a lot of doubt on what you printed as the events that have happened, then it would be a slam dunk self defense case. But since other people would rather weigh both sides of the evidence, witnesses, and testimony it is far from settled.
Indeed. Also, blame the media for releasing the photo that was released to them of the victim! Blame the media for using the picture of Zimmerman that was publicly available! A lot of other screwups by the media, but the pictures? Really?
Please share this evidence that Zimmerman wasn't on his way back to his truck. So who was it that was calling out for help on the 911 call? I agree there is a lot that is still unknown. I also will go ahead and say that Zimmerman is probably an idiot. But the things that have been presented to the public if looked at without media bias it looks like a simple self defense case. But of course the media will have none of that and will do all they can to make this about race and try to make this the most watched trial of all time next to maybe the OJ case.
The thing I keep going back to is that none of this happens if Zimmerman had stayed in his car and waited for police to arrive. The moment he stepped out of his vehicle to confront Martin is the moment when everything started going downhill. Whether it is self-defense or not, he's at fault because of that fact alone. Guilty of murder? No. But he definitely should get jail time IMO. Martin's drug use or owning a gun has no bearing on the fact that he wasn't being a deviant when walking home from the store.
All of that is irrelevant. You can easily say if Martin was in school, none of this would happen. The point is neither were breaking the law at the time. What matters is who escalated the situation. I am partial to Zimmerman's position because he was fed up with all the crime in the neighborhood. I find no fault in someone who confronts a stranger in a neighborhood. Could he have done it poorly and escalated this situation, sure, but we don't know for sure. We know little about zimmerman and martin, but it seems they both were very capable of escalating the situation.
Fair enough, but who defines Martin as a stranger in the neighborhood, Zimmerman? Why does Martin have to prove to a non-authoritative figure who he is or where he belongs? Was he looking in windows or seeing if any homes were unlocked, or was he just walking home? Again, this is something that the police should have determined answers to, not Zimmerman. If he sees Martin accost a neighbor, smoking a joint, or trying to break in to a house, then GZ should approach and find out WTF. No indications have been given to that effect. The problem escalated when Zimmerman confronted Martin. Since Zimmerman is not a cop or is not Martin's legal guardian, he should have monitored and waited for the police. That's where his responsibility ends.
How you define a stranger has no baring. The point is Zimmerman didn't recognize him as a resident of the neighborhood. And yes, I believe Zimmerman did say he was looking into windows and wandering/walking around (not in a specific direction), but again, that has little to do with who escalated the situation. What Zimmerman should have done and his responsibilities have nothing to do with the law. Approaching someone is not against the law. Provoking someone to attacking you and shooting them dead is. We don't know if that is the case.
It's been gone over by me and others time and time again. One of the witnesses who was on the phone with Martin and one of the eye witnesses. Other eye witnesses contradict. There are conflicting claims. As far as who that was calling out for help, the voice was identified as being that of Martin not Zimmerman. Again there are conflicting reports here. I think Martin seems like a wannabe thug, and Zimmerman is an overzealous vigilante wannabe cop. I don't have a soft spot for either of them. It's only a clear cut case if you don't believe any of the testimony and evidence that points to Zimmerman attacking Martin. It's only clear cut if you believe everything Zimmerman and his family have put forward. That would be odd because we know that Zimmerman has lied and also changed his story, but you can believe whatever you wish. If you look at the conflicting witness statements and evidence then it seems there would need to be a trial to get down to the bottom of it.
If he would have had a concealed carry, I'm sure none of this would have transpired and the two of them could have parted amicably.
When you're following someone in the dark, the person being followed has every right to defend himself. Number two, Martin was a minor and Zimmerman was the adult. We expect adults to have better judgement than minors. Third, Zimmerman was armed and following a minor in the dark despite being told not to by the police operator. Zimmerman put himself in that situation by his actions. None of this would have happened if Zimmerman as an adult had exercised better judgement and common sense. At any time he cold have stopped following Martin, especially once Martin knew he was being followed.
I'll wait for the evidence to show that was the case rather than just presume it's the truth. When there's conflicting evidence (and there is) it seems wiser to wait and see.
wrong! 1) Are you admitting Martin attack Zimmerman? You do not have a right to attack someone you think is following you. There are no if's, ands, or butts. If you think otherwise, you're out of your mind and you should stay home. 2) Martin being a minor has nothing to do with the incident. 3) There is no point in arguing this point. Its been beaten to death. You are set in your mind that Zimmerman was a racist out to kill black people. We all make mistakes and Zimmerman no doubt would have done things different if he knew the outcome. By your judgement, we would all have been in prison if we took into account of all the disasters that could have happened from our foolish decisions.
Actually, it is illegal to cause someone's death by being foolish or negligent. Also to endanger others by being reckless. I wouldn't claim to know whether any of those laws apply here, though.
That would be my point. For example, many have driven drunk at some point in their life, which of course, is a foolish decision. While Zimmerman would have been wiser not to follow or keep up with Martin, I wouldn't exactly put his actions in the same category as reckless...unless you want to assume Zimmerman was out for a fight. Zimmerman volunteered and was appointed to be on watch for the neighborhood and all of his past actions did not show any significant irrational behavior. There is no reason to believe he was looking for an altercation, regardless what others believe and the media has portrayed. All that matters in this case is how events unfolded when the two met. Nobody knows what really happens and its foolish to assume otherwise.
