^^ you clearly don't know what the word "irony" means.

Zimmerman got off because he claims ignorance of authority, but you're suggesting that Martin should have yielded to Zimmerman's authority, when Zimmerman had no obvious authority. He was just a thug with a gun as far as martin was concerned.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:33 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 11:33:23 PM

Quote :

"Can you itemize which things that Martin was actually doing there you find suspicious? Because none of that is suspicious."

Ok, let me explain this for you.

Everyone's definition of suspicious behavior is not the same.

What might be suspicious to me, might not be suspicious to you.

So it's basically pointless to sit here and argue over what we think Zimmerman himself thinks is suspicious.

Obviously someone walking at night, in the rain, in a hoodie in his neighborhood that had had some recent breakins WAS SUSPICIOUS TO ZIMMERMAN.

That is all that matters.


Suspicious is a very loose and vague term, so to sit here and try and say what someone else would or does consider suspicious is stupid.

In the call he says this is suspicious behavior to him.

Thats all we need.

4/11/2012 11:34:22 PM

Look guys, you're not going to convince the other to see it your way. Just let it go. Whatever is going to happen will happen.

4/11/2012 11:35:37 PM

so trayvon was acting suspicious enough to call 911

suspicious enough to ignore 911 dispatchers suggestion and follow trayvon anyway

but not so suspicious as to scare zimmerman from getting out of his car and confronting him

again, makes perfect sense.

4/11/2012 11:36:33 PM

Quote :

"It's irrelevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing, because it turned out Zimmerman was wrong. If a dumb person thinks dumb things and acts on this, we don't, and shouldn't excuse them when they are wrong. And things that Zimmerman couldn't possibly know don't give credence to his claims he was acting suspicious. When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior."

Quote :

"He was wrong, because Martin wasn't actually doing anything suspicious. If a mad man thinks demons are coming out of his kids body, and murders his kid to get rid of the demons, this all seems perfectly reasonable to him. But thankfully, society doesn't weigh things this way, and doesn't excuse him for this. It's irrelevant if Zimmerman "felt" Martin was doing something suspicious, if he can't actually describe suspicious behavior, and we know in hind-sight that Martin was walking around with skittles and tea."

Of course, but Z didn't do anything illegal by following him and keeping an eye on him.

Wrong? Maybe...depends on the manner in which he was following him (casually keeping an eye on him, or was it a more in-your-face, harassing sort of way?)...but it would have to be pretty extreme for it to be illegal.



I'll also add that M very well may have looked reasonably suspicious, but that Z couldn't really articulate everything that gave him a gut feeling. Again, nothing illegal here.

What matters is how the altercation got started, and in any case, even if Z was on the wrong side of that, it shouldn't be murder 2 unless the facts are drastically out of line from what pretty much everyone on both sides reasonably believes.


* I don't necessarily believe that Z is innocent. Nor do I necessarily believe that he is guilty. I just think that people are (1) jumping to conclusions, and (2) making decisions based on the wrong reasons and things that are irrelevant.

4/11/2012 11:36:39 PM

I'm down with that.

4/11/2012 11:36:40 PM

this thread needs more ponies

4/11/2012 11:36:45 PM

Quote :

"but not so suspicious as to scare zimmerman from getting out of his car and confronting him"

...like this.

Irrelevant.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:38 PM. Reason : and faulty logic, to boot]

4/11/2012 11:37:29 PM

Quote :

"so trayvon was acting suspicious enough to call 911 suspicious enough to ignore 911 dispatchers suggestion and follow trayvon anyway but not so suspicious as to scare zimmerman from getting out of his car and confronting him again, makes perfect sense."

Yes he was.

Suggestions, suspicious is not always threatening, not illegal to follow.

So to follow this person in order to see where they are running to in order to give the location to the cops makes perfect sense.

Yes.

4/11/2012 11:38:43 PM

Zimmerman has been arrested on charges presented by a republican prosecutor. There is evidence we are not aware which probably shows that Zimmerman is guilty of criminal activity. The 'stand your ground' laws will be repelled and racists will have to think twice before shooting innocent people.

4/11/2012 11:39:05 PM

Now you're just trolling.

4/11/2012 11:39:47 PM

In the call he says this is suspicious behavior to him fucking coons.

Thats all we need.


[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:41 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2012 11:40:51 PM

^^^

Hello, you appear to have lost your hat.



Now go sit your ass down in the corner.


The only thing in your entire post that isn't fucking stupid is that there could be additional evidence we're not aware of.

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:42 PM. Reason : ^^^]

4/11/2012 11:41:40 PM

Quote :

"What matters is how the altercation got started"

I'll tell you how the altercation got started.

George fucking Zimmerman woke up one day with a hard-on for his neighborhood watch duties and decided to follow Trayvon Martin for 'looking suspicious'.

THATS how the altercation got started.

4/11/2012 11:41:40 PM

he didn't say fucking coons

that shit was doctored

4/11/2012 11:41:56 PM

^^ Goddammit, that is not a crime, unless his "following" was on the extreme side of harassment. It very well may not have even been wrong.

4/11/2012 11:43:44 PM

Quote :

"I'll tell you how the altercation got started. George fucking Zimmerman woke up one day with a hard-on for his neighborhood watch duties and decided to follow Trayvon Martin for 'looking suspicious'. THATS how the altercation got started. "

Except, NONE OF THAT IS FUCKING ILLEGAL.

So if someone jumps you while you are doing that and starts attacking you they have started the altercation.

For fucks sake. It scares me that some of you actually were able to get into the school I currently attend.

4/11/2012 11:44:00 PM

Quote :

"Now you're just trolling."

we have a winner!!!

but i did like the point about following someone so as to give the police the 'suspicious persons' whereabouts. good point. but why get out of the car and try to talk to him if the po po were on their way?

4/11/2012 11:44:15 PM

hey, in other news, did you guys hear that the Titanic actually happened? i thought it was just a movie!! haha!

4/11/2012 11:45:08 PM

Quote :

"but i did like the point about following someone so as to give the police the 'suspicious persons' whereabouts. good point. but why get out of the car and try to talk to him if the po po were on their way?"

HE DIDN'T

FUCKING SHIT.

Some of you literally have no clue what you are talking about.

Go listen to the fucking 911 call.

At no point does he get out and attempt to talk to him.

While on the phone with 911 he is still on the phone with 911 discussing things when he says that Trayvon just took off running, and then after that, we hear his car door open.

4/11/2012 11:45:57 PM

It's fun seeing all the racists in here get so mad,

4/11/2012 11:46:09 PM

Quote :

"Everyone's definition of suspicious behavior is not the same. What might be suspicious to me, might not be suspicious to you. So it's basically pointless to sit here and argue over what we think Zimmerman himself thinks is suspicious. "

You brought this up to support your notion that Z wasn't profiling M, but instead he "saw" him do something suspicious.

What you seem to acknowledge is that Martin wasn't actually DOING anything suspicious, but Zimmerman FELT he was.

When someone FEELS that someone else is doing something suspicious without any ACTUAL PROOF, this is profiling, at best. This is him pre-judging Martin.

4/11/2012 11:46:14 PM

^^^^^1. Not illegal. Doesn't matter.
2. I guess it's just a personality difference. Most people probably aren't wired to do that, but some people are, and that's fine and a good thing.


^ Not illegal. Maybe distasteful, maybe even wrong, but not illegal. Maybe not wrong at all--maybe something just didn't seem quite right about the way he was carrying about his business or looking at houses, even if M hadn't done anything wrong. Especially the wake of a bunch of burglaries, is it wrong to keep an eye on him?

What if he hadn't even done anything suspicious, but Z didn't recognize him (not that you know every person in a gated community, but you prob at least recognize a lot of them), and what if he matched a known description of a burglar?

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:50 PM. Reason : ]

4/11/2012 11:46:17 PM

Pearl Harbor was in Hawaii!

4/11/2012 11:46:18 PM

A GOOD THING?

wow, you people

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:48 PM. Reason : ,]

4/11/2012 11:47:59 PM

I guess we're going to continue to ignore the fact that Martin found Zimmerman's legal following to be suspicious?

4/11/2012 11:48:33 PM

seems like it they never seem to address that issue

4/11/2012 11:49:25 PM

Who the hell is ok with being followed for no damn good reason???

4/11/2012 11:50:28 PM

its the eggs... theyre too... colorful for us to continue to use our brains itt

4/11/2012 11:50:44 PM

He was profiling him.

As a suspicious person.

Not because he was black.

Quote :

"What you seem to acknowledge is that Martin wasn't actually DOING anything suspicious, but Zimmerman FELT he was. When someone FEELS that someone else is doing something suspicious without any ACTUAL PROOF, this is profiling, at best. This is him pre-judging Martin."

Yes, he was doing something suspicious.

It was suspicious to Zimmerman.

To Zimmerman, walking in the rain at night in a hoodie and stopping and staring at houses IS SUSPICIOUS TO HIM. That is actual proof. He says it in the 911 call. THIS IS SUSPICIOUS TO ME. There is no set in stone definition of suspicious. It's up to individual people to set their own level of what is suspicious.

4/11/2012 11:50:47 PM

That's primarily because Martin is dead, and can't tell his side.

4/11/2012 11:50:48 PM

Quote :

"Who the hell is ok with being followed for no damn good reason???"

Most people aren't.

And most people who get followed aren't going to just start attacking someone for doing it either.

It's like the black guy I was talking to at work who said why I was trying to explain to him that Zimmerman was just following him and that that wasn't illegal and he said

"You start following my ass for no reason you gonna get your ass beat"

Which is possibly the same attitude that Trayvon had.

I don't think that most of us on here are going to say that if we see or feel someone following us that our first reaction is going to be to start beating their ass.

4/11/2012 11:53:05 PM

Zimmerman got dropped quick by those lawyers, I wonder what made them run?

^You're making too many generalizations. If a a racist was following you, would you be ok with it?

[Edited on April 11, 2012 at 11:54 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2012 11:53:13 PM

Quote :

"He was profiling him. As a suspicious person. Not because he was black. "

Okay, you're getting closer.

so, you have already acknowledged that by tacolu's standard of suspicious behavior, Martin wasn't actually acting suspicious.

So if Zimmerman FELT Martin was acting suspicious, be he didn't have any actually suspicious things he saw or could describe Martin doing, then what other aspects do human beings judge people by that would have lead Zimmerman to believe Martin was suspicious?

4/11/2012 11:54:59 PM

They explained it in their press conference, which you apparently didn't watch.

4/11/2012 11:55:08 PM

Quote :

"To Zimmerman, walking in the rain at night in a hoodie and stopping and staring at houses IS SUSPICIOUS TO HIM. That is actual proof. He says it in the 911 call. THIS IS SUSPICIOUS TO ME. There is no set in stone definition of suspicious. It's up to individual people to set their own level of what is suspicious."

That is if you even believe the line "He's looking at all the houses."

Which I don't, at all.

4/11/2012 11:56:50 PM

Quote :

"I don't think that most of us on here are going to say that if we see or feel someone following us that our first reaction is going to be to start beating their ass."

What do the actions most of us would take have to do with anything? Martin clearly found being followed by Zimmerman to be threatening.

4/11/2012 11:57:28 PM

Quote :

"So if Zimmerman FELT Martin was acting suspicious, be he didn't have any actually suspicious things he saw or could describe Martin doing, then what other aspects do human beings judge people by that would have lead Zimmerman to believe Martin was suspicious? "

Are you fucking trolling?

Because I've explained it to you at least 3 times already.

Seeing someone walking at night in a hoodie in the rain, and stopping and looking at houses in a neighborhood that has had a bunch of recent breakins is the suspicious behavior that he saw. The suspicious behavior that he also described.

I'm not going to explain it to you again, but you are more than free to say he didn't see or describe anything that he thought was suspicious.

4/11/2012 11:58:17 PM

Quote :

"A GOOD THING? wow, you people"

Look, I've done plenty of things that were at a minimum, not wrong, and many were good, though the average person predominantly concerned with their personal safety would not be wired to act in such a way.

Quote :

"I guess we're going to continue to ignore the fact that Martin found Zimmerman's legal following to be suspicious? "

Quote :

"Who the hell is ok with being followed for no damn good reason???"

Nobody is, of course.

That's why I say that a big piece of this is the manner in which Z was following him. Was he harassing the shit out of him until M lashed out, and then Z shot him? Not OK, Z. Was it just Z following him to see where he went, casually keeping an eye on him? M understandably and very justifiably wouldn't have liked that--I'm 100% with you there. It depends on what he did from there, though. It depends on which one of them lost his cool and did something stupid. Z was likely justified in following him, and M was justified in having a problem with being followed.

4/11/2012 11:58:34 PM

im convinced tacolu is a beaner ms13 ganbanging borderhopper

his full name is Taco Luiz Ramos

4/11/2012 11:59:03 PM

That is if you even believe the line "He's looking at all the houses."

Which I don't, at all.

That is if you even believe the line "He's looking at all the houses."

Which I don't, at all.

That is if you even believe the line "He's looking at all the houses."

Which I don't, at all.

4/11/2012 11:59:42 PM

Quote :

"It's irrelevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing, because it turned out Zimmerman was wrong."

Unfortunately for your argument, it's not irrelevant at all what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing. If this was true then you just invalidated every single fucking self-defense claim ever!

It is very relevant what Zimmerman thought Martin was doing for two reasons. The first being in order to convict on Murder 2 they need to be able to prove that Zimmerman was acting with malice in his mind. If Zimmerman made an honest mistake and his beliefs were wrong, then he didn't act with malice in his mind and he shouldn't be convicted of Murder 2.

The next point goes to help the defense, as they can make a "mistake of fact" argument, meaning that Zimmerman made a mistake of some crucial facts of the situation (such as the Tea not being a gun), that can be used to introduce doubt to the jury and help bolster his claim of self-defense.

So to say that what Zimmerman believed is irrelevant in hindsight is completely fucking wrong. It's not like we're born with crystal balls in our nuts that allows us to tell the future.

Quote :

" If a dumb person thinks dumb things and acts on this, we don't, and shouldn't excuse them when they are wrong."

We do all of the time.

Do some reading up on self-defense:

http://www.lawteacher.net/criminal-law/cases/self-defence.php

Quote :

" In Beckford v R (1988), the defendant police officer shot dead a suspect, having been told that he was armed and dangerous, because he feared for his own life. The prosecution case was that the victim had been unarmed and thus presented no threat to the defendant. The trial judge directed the jury that the defendant's belief in the need to shoot in self-defence had to be both honest and reasonable. In rejecting this direction, the Privy Council approved the approach in Williams. Lord Griffiths commented that juries should be given the following guidance: "Whether the plea is self-defence or defence of another, if the defendant may have been labouring under a mistake as to facts, he must be judged according to his mistaken belief of the facts: that is so whether the mistake was, on an objective view, a reasonable mistake or not." The defendant therefore, had a defence of self-defence because the killing was not unlawful if, in the circumstances as he perceived them to be, he had used reasonable force to defend himself."

Cops have shot people because they thought a wallet was a gun. People have been shot out of self-defense because someone mistook their actions as being malicious when they were not, and they have been acquitted.

When it comes to self-defense, it's not a matter of being right or wrong in the end, it's a matter of were your assumptions fair and reasonable and whether or not you used enough force to defend yourself.

If Zimmerman thought Trayvon had a gun or that he felt Trayvon was going after his gun, he had a reasonable justification to protect himself.

At the same time, Trayvon could have just as easily shot Zimmerman and still got away with self-defense as well.

Quote :

"When the 911 operator asked, Zimmerman could only ever say he was "suspicious." We have the full 911 call, so it is a KNOWN FACT that Zimmerman only "felt" Martin was suspicious, he didn't see Martin partake in any specific action that qualifies to a "reasonable person" as suspicious behavior."

You're point? Zimmerman can still chase after Trayvon.

Quote :

"This is true, and if Zimmerman 1) was a cop 2) was dressed as a cop 3) showed a badge 4) followed the same procedure a cop would have [note: this is impossible, because he doesn't have the tools a cop would have had] then i would 100% support him. None of these things are true."

You don't have to be a cop to question someone... Just like you don't have to be a police officer to arrest someone either (or in NC's case, detain someone).

Quote :

"A claim he isn't able to substantiate with any describable actions, that we know in hindsight was wrong. "

Hindsight is irrelevant. Depending on the circumstances, the jury may be instructed to judge Zimmerman's actions on the pretense of Zimmerman's beliefs (mistake of facts). But, even if in hindsight Trayvon hadn't done anything illegal, that still doesn't mean Zimmerman did anything wrong in chasing Trayvon and trying to question him.

Quote :

"He was wrong, because Martin wasn't actually doing anything suspicious."

There had been a rash of break ins in his neighborhood. He saw a person stopping and looking at house, he thought they had a gun based on how the hand was positioned. The person then started running. In hindsight, we know why he ran. But at that moment in time Zimmerman doesn't know why. So Zimmerman took after him (perfectly legal and fine). After that, the details are shady. We know Zimmerman tried questioning Trayvon (again, perfectly legal and that alone provides no justification for anyone to hit anyone). What we don't know is who started hitting who and who was on top of who though.

I don't see anything unreasonable with Zimmerman taking off after Trayvon or his suspicion given the circumstances of the situation both present and past. And I don't see anything unreasonable with Zimmerman asking Trayvon what he was doing there.

4/12/2012 12:00:06 AM

Zimmerman is not a cop, he is not justified in following anyone for no good reason.

[Edited on April 12, 2012 at 12:00 AM. Reason : T]

4/12/2012 12:00:37 AM

Quote :

"Seeing someone walking at night in a hoodie in the rain, and stopping and looking at houses in a neighborhood that has had a bunch of recent breakins is the suspicious behavior that he saw. The suspicious behavior that he also described. I'm not going to explain it to you again, but you are more than free to say he didn't see or describe anything that he thought was suspicious."

what is suspicious about 1) walking 2) at night 3) with a hoodie 4) in the rain ?

If it was raining, what is appropriate attire, if not something that covers your head?

I walk at night on occasion. I don't own a hoodie, but i'd definitely wear one in the rain at night if I had one. Considering that streets are often surrounded with houses, and I don't just stare at the ground as I walk, I also do look at houses.

Zimmerman had no rational logical reason, based on his own statements, to believe martin was suspicious. This is clear to anyone with a brain.

^^^ you linked to a British law site, LOL (and bolded a quote out of context).

[Edited on April 12, 2012 at 12:07 AM. Reason : ]

4/12/2012 12:01:54 AM

i usually look at houses when i walk to CVS

KILL ME GEORGE

4/12/2012 12:04:14 AM

What do all the racists in here gain. The kid is dead.

4/12/2012 12:04:18 AM

Quote :

"Zimmerman is not a cop, he is not justified in following anyone for no good reason."

This is where you are missing the boat.

It is not illegal to follow anyone.

I can go out tomorrow, go to the mall, find some hot girl, follow her around the mall, and then follow her in my car while she drives home and see where she lives.

And it's all perfectly legal.


To many of you seem to be hung on the fact that you think following someone is illegal.

4/12/2012 12:05:19 AM

HE IS NO KID.

there is a picture of him with his middle finger up.

and he was suspended from school.

WHAT A THUG

4/12/2012 12:05:28 AM

Quote :

""You start following my ass for no reason you gonna get your ass beat" Which is possibly the same attitude that Trayvon had."

That is what I'm saying...I can kinda see Z following him (likely quite reasonable), M thinking "I'm not doing anything wrong" and getting pissed about it. Totally reasonable actions by both up to this point, and neither of them is wrong.

...but then if M, just like the aforementioned guy says HE would, overreacts and says "I'm gonna beat this dude's ass", and Z says "Not very much, you're not. Not before I shoot you"...well, it's a tragedy for everyone, but actions have consequences, and that would be a case of M making a dumb mistake that a teenager could easily make, and paying the ultimate price for it.


Again, I don't know that's what happened. I wasn't there. I'm just saying that if I were forced to just give my most likely guess, that's what it would be.

4/12/2012 12:05:32 AM

if rich people were to shoot everyone that looked at their house

what if "M" says "why the fuck are you followin me back the fuck off"

and "Z" gets all butthurt because the nigger didnt bow down and kiss his shoe and decides to show him what for by pullin his strap

and then M goes to the ground to tryb to continue to wrestle the gun from Z and he fucks up and misses the grab and gets shot

lets all make up scenarios and see who wins in the end



[Edited on April 12, 2012 at 12:08 AM. Reason : r]

4/12/2012 12:05:33 AM