Trayvon Martin aside, ’stand your ground’ law is stupid

“Republicans do scare easily.”

Yet Zimmer was a registered democrat.

Got to love libs and their 1st grade comprehension skills.

• Link
• Report this comment

History repeat itself yet again:

Obama & the cops acted stupidly
The AJC and the stalking of Richard Jewel
Duke LaCrosse
etc.
etc.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gee Jay, you have convicted Zimmerman even though all the facts are not known. you also dissimate the stand your ground law as you are not aware how it could apply. What really happened is unknown, but the law may well apply to Martin. It bascially says you do not have to give up ground if you are threated…If it is proven that Martin was standing his ground…well then….but Jay, you and those like you who go on emotion and one liners never do the research or try to understand the facts as presented …but then as another blogger points out…Hate Crime is in the same boat!!

• Link
• Report this comment

pea

Obama has every right to comment and I thought his words were very sincere and definitely would be of comfort to the aggrieved parents…

• Link
• Report this comment

Gee Jay, you have convicted Zimmerman…

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Three Black Men Murder White Mississippi State University Student”

And when public furor rises to the level of the Florida case, I’m sure that Obama would answer a question about it when asked by the press. If you remember, Obama just didn’t blurt out some statement. He was asked about it by a member of the press during a press conference. C’mon man, don’t try to make an issue from something that doesn’t amount to one.

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet, Pardon my assumption that you know the difference beween “posses, have and own.: I said a felon cannot “own” a gun. We all know saturday night specials can be acquired by most anyone. I am confused about his “arrest” for assault on a police officer. The DemocratUnderground reported he was arrested in Virginia and that his father was a judge. Now he was arrested near the University of Florida? When the smoke clears and the dust settles we will know the truth. That however does not answer the question, where is the Justice Department? They are supposed to protect everyone’s rights even Zimmerman’s.

• Link
• Report this comment

Got to love libs and their 1st grade comprehension skills.

If calling yourself a lib makes that pill easier for you to swallow, go for it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer: “I’ve read lots of things but I did not read Zimmerman’s name anywhere in my post. Did you.”

No but Zimmerman was the subject of Jon Stewart’s comment that I did read in your post. Bit touchy about the inconvenient fact that he is a Democrat, huh?

• Link
• Report this comment

stands- They seem to hate it when Obama acknowledges that he and his family are… you know… black

Using the new Zimmerman standard, obama is now white-African-American. Make sure to emphasize he’s white in the future.

• Link
• Report this comment

I don’t disagree with Jay per se. But, he’s a tad simplistic. Every situation is unique; and when you’re in it, options close quite rapidly. That said, we’re also a country where we don’t abide a group of citizens putting out a bounty on other citizens’ heads (sorry, the term is lynch mob). Morever, any “dead or alive” bounty is akin to hiring a hit man. So ask yourself this readers: where is Jay’s column abut the Black Panthers? Guess what? It ain’t coming. And it’s not coming because Jay believes in an agenda narrative where different standards apply to different people because of group empathies. Imagine if the Klan put out bounties on the blacks who’ve been attacking whites lately (murder at MSU, burning a kid in Kansas City…)—we’d ALL denounce the Klan quite loudly. Black Panthers…well…naw; ’cause their racism is okay.

• Link
• Report this comment

MiltonMan

GM, you need to replace white kid with hispanic kid pal to

You dont hear hispanic out there defending zimmerman, all you hear are whites making excuses why this killing was justifield.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bro – That sucks. It is worth a try though.

MiltonMan – Probably because the national outcry isn’t there. If the President were to spend his time commenting on ever murder, or even every murder of college age or younger people, in America, he wouldn’t have time for anything else. On second thought, maybe that isn’t such a bad idea.

• Link
• Report this comment

godless,

The topic is the stupid stand your ground law and Jon Stewart’s comments were actually geared toward it. Kinda touchy about that. So much so that you seem to want to deflect.

• Link
• Report this comment

“You dont hear hispanic out there defending zimmerman, all you hear are whites making excuses why this killing was justifield.”

Yes, let’s just conveniently brush aside all pertinent facts and let’s all play judge & jury based upon who is defending who.

Man, for the love of God I hope that you are not in the legal profession.

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer,

“The topic is the stupid stand your ground law and Jon Stewart’s comments were actually geared toward it. ”

Haven’t read you going all snarky on all the posters that mentioned Zimmerman in this discussion of the Stand Your Ground Law? Just when it was pointed out that Zimmerman was a Democrat, a fact that made Jon Stewart look like a fool.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone

Only the lead investigator because of the fact that he appears to have seen holes in Zimmerman’s story. From what I’ve been able to see, the story doesn’t match the scene and/or evidence that’s been released. If the lead investigator wanted an arrest but the SAO didn’t, then the reason for the non-arrest lies in the SAO’s lap and not the lead investigator. I still think there was lots of sloppy work, but at least the lead investigator didn’t buy the story hook, line, and sinker as it has been portrayed by the media.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay @ 8:50

• Link
• Report this comment

“Yes, let’s just conveniently brush aside all pertinent facts ”

The most pertinent legal fact here is who sought out the confrontation? You cannot decouple the stalking of Martin and the alleged assault of Zimmerman as a result of the stalking. Sorry MM one directly led to the other. Zim may get off without any charges because of the way the law was written ( I doubt it, but maybe…) but he is culpable.

• Link
• Report this comment

rightwing troll:

Since you must have been an eye witness I hope your contacting the authorities…..

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet:

I live to make you left wing freaks foam at the mouth….

• Link
• Report this comment

“Heathen, Zimmerman’s political affiliation has no more relevance than the brand of SUV he was ”
driving. ”

Tell Mr. Jon Stewart. Have you read the list of states that have Stand Your Ground Laws? Seem to be a mix of Red and Blue States.

But Mr. Stewart implies it’s a Republican thing and TaxPayer parrots him. You all just wish he was a Republican but since he’s not, it doesn’t matter.

• Link
• Report this comment

Haven’t read you going all snarky on all the posters that mentioned Zimmerman in this discussion of the Stand Your Ground Law? Just when it was pointed out that Zimmerman was a Democrat, a fact that made Jon Stewart look like a fool.

Snarky, godless. Snarky would be if you took my original post and proved to me that the stand your ground bill was the product of a majority of Democrats and their undying support for the NRA. Snarky would be you showing me where I mentioned Zimmerman in conjunction with Republican or Zimmerman at all in my original post. Snarky would be if you showed me that Jon Stewart did not focus his effort on the stand your ground law…

• Link
• Report this comment

Its been said many times. Liberals could care less who gets killed its the thought of dividing Americans that they seek.

The logic is simply hilarious. So, since it’s been said that many times Bigfoot has been spotted, that means that Bigfoot exists. It’s been said many times that dropping a penny off the Empire State Building would kill a person on the ground that was hit, so that is also true just because it’s been said many times.

Boy, when your burden of truth lies with the idea that since it’s been said many times, it’s true, you can make truth out of anything you wish, facts be damned….

Brilliant!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh. I see how this works. Obamacare is stupid. That settles it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Conservatives are such hypocrites! The pro-life folks value life only from the time sperm mates with eggs to expulsion from the womb. After that, life is cheap, and only becomes valuable again upon reaching military age (George Carlin). Now, gun-worshiping conservatives are trying mightily to rationalize an easily avoidable killing by a law-and-order fanatic who had called 911 many times to report people who actually happened to live in his neighborhood. He was well known to the 911 operators, who told him not to confront his tantalizing prey.

• Link
• Report this comment

I like stand your ground law.If you think your life is threatened you do not have to run.You use necessary force to protect self.In your home it’s even better.Just like our concealed weapon law.If there is a chance you have a concealed weapon,the perp. will think twice.

• Link
• Report this comment

I see that there is no way that the pro-Treyvon Martin crowd will be satisfied with anything less than a pubilc execution of Zimmerman without regard to witness testimony, etc. Seems to me to be nothing short of a lynching, but I guess that lynching is ok so long as it confroms with what you want. From what I can glean from police reports, wtiness statements, etc., Zimmerman was following Martin becuase Martin was acting “suspicious” (admit, possible racial implications in this aspect), lost sight of him, and then as he was walking back to his car or wherever, Martin comes up to im, punches him hard enough in his nose to break it, knocks him down and starts slamming his head into the sidewalk. I ownder how people would feel about this case had the race of none of the participants been known, or Martin had been white and Zimmerman black. This whole thing is just another example of how racist, white-to-blakc AND black-to-white, this country remains.

• Link
• Report this comment

Self-defense, legally defined is a defense to criminal homicide, assault and battery, or crimes involving the attempted use of violence against an individual who is not the aggressor. The defense rests on the general right of a person to use reasonable force to defend him/herself from aggressors use or threat of unlawful force.

Unlawful force is the commission or threat of commission of crime or tort. The law will generally recognize particular situations where the use of deadly force is excused or justified. Generally in Anglo-American law, one may kill an assailant when he/she reasonably believes that he/she is in imminent danger of being killed or seriously injured, and that killing the assailant is necessary in avoiding such harm. Civilized jurisdictions require that the party under attack must attempt to retreat if it can be done without increasing risk which would be the reasonable thing to do in most cases. People with guns, however aren’t known for being the most reasonable people on earth!

The defendant may stand his/her ground in most cases unless he/she provoked the assailant purposely, or by gross negligence, or if the assailant has some incapacity, such as infancy, inebriation or mental disease. Other instances where deadly force is authorized are defense of others and defense of one’s property. An example of justified use of reasonable force may be shooting an assailant that attacked you with a knife or other deadly weapon.

An example of unreasonable use of deadly force, in most cases could be killing an intruder or “prowler with no knowledge of the degree of the actual threat; not knowing whether the threat is armed or unarmed, etc. or killing another form of unarmed assumed threat which reflects the case in the Trayvon Martin case or even the nostalgic 1984 Bernie Goetz case in Manhattan .
Pleas of self-defense are closely analyzed by courts to determine their legitimacy except in many mostly southern states where draconian “stand your ground” laws are in place which removes any duty by an armed citizen to retreat from danger and allows the use of deadly force if there’s a reasonable fear of death or grave harm. But as I mentioned, people that carry guns are not always the most reasonable individuals as has been seen. I, myself was involved in such a case where the plea of self-defense by an assailant to my body and person was only partially disproved and not charged with a top count of attempted murder after discharging a .45 caliber pistol at me whose bullet entered my forehead and subsequently exited the posterior of my skull trans-cranially. The circumstances surrounding the incident resonate loudly with the same issues involved in the Florida Trayvon Martin case that also demonstrate no matter how sheltered from ‘stand your ground’ laws we are locally, they can affect us all in this country wherever we are as the following case involves two Jefferson County,NY men, myself and a Watertown,NY man unfortunately crossing paths in another state with deadly results.
To preserve the validity of this case as unbiased reference, I will only refer to myself as the victim, not,”I”, preserving, for this purpose, the analytical third person point of view.

The case to which I am referring is Commonwealth of Virginia vs. Jay A. Pratt v Jan. 1996. The undisputed facts of the case are as follows. On the evening of Aug 13, 1994 at about 6:30 P.M, EST, The Stafford county, Virginia (911) service received a call from the residence of a Jay Allen Pratt, 33 previously of Watertown, NY reporting that a shooting had occurred. Pratt claimed he shot his stepdaughter’s boyfriend, Michael R. Jason, U.S.N., 20, of Sackets Harbor, NY once in the head. Emergency services were immediately dispatched.

On arrival they found the victim face down in the downstairs bedroom with a gunshot wound to his head, entrance in the right forehead, exit wound in the right parietal occipital region of his head. The suspect, Jay Pratt was immediately taken into custody when he apparently waived his right to legal counsel during interrogation and made some disturbing statements Pratt reported that the two men had been drinking all afternoon. Pratt’s stepdaughter and wife were working that afternoon. The two men apparently were viewing a movie that evening and decided to order a pizza.

The victim proceeded to the kitchen to find the phone number for the order when he reportedly noticed some phone numbers of people his girlfriend, Pratt’s stepdaughter had been seeing. He allegedly became enraged and returned to the downstairs bedroom adjacent to the living room. The victim then telephoned Pratt’s stepdaughter at her place of employment to confront her. Pratt reported that he called her and became very loud and angry with his stepdaughter over the phone.

His stepdaughter’s statement reflected the same, reporting he was yelling at her very angrily. She claimed to have calmed him down, but he then began threatening suicide. The connection then was broken as the victim dropped the telephone. During the interrogation the suspect stated that the victim went to get the phone number and returned very upset, and then proceeded into the adjacent bedroom and called his stepdaughter.

Pratt then stated that he heard the victim yelling and screaming on the phone. Pratt claimed that from his vantage point he could see the victim in the bedroom. He claimed that the victim was standing flush against a steel three drawer filing cabinet with the phone and one hand behind his back. He stated that he believed the victim had one of the guns that he kept unlocked in the bedroom so he got up from the chair he was sitting in and went out to his truck and took possession of a .45cal pistol, and went back into the house.

He returned to the chair and sat down placing the gun between the cushion and the arm. The victim was still standing and on the phone at that point. Pratt then stood up with the gun at his side, and walked to the open door of the bedroom and stated, get the hell off the phone! He then reported that the victim, still standing as before described, then revealed the hand behind his back with the .38 revolver that Pratt kept loaded on his bedpost, pointing the gun at him Pratt then stated that he shot the victim.

During the interrogation, the detectives gave the suspect a harsh third degree interrogation and insisted that he was the aggressor. The suspect responded with a pompous and sickening to me, the victim, “maybe I was!” This statement along with evidence from the crime scene brought on deep suspicion from the investigators. One key piece of evidence was the position of the victim’s body, shell casing of expended round and position of the alleged weapon that the victim’s body was out of position by almost three feet.

The .38 cal pistol the victim was said to have had was found resting perfectly flush with the filing cabinet, barrel up, hammer in the cocked position. The detectives found certain aspects of Pratt’s story tonot sit well with them The most unsettling, the shell casing position. The victim was shot through the bedroom doorway from the living room approx5-6 feet away from the victim. The shell casing was found in the bedroom. A Colt.45 pistol ejects the casing back and to the left. The casing could not have been ejected into the bedroom. The hammer position of the second gun that Jay Pratt alleged the victim had in his possession was also called into question.

If Pratt’s story is fact then the gun would have been dropped by the victim as soon as he was shot. The impact of the gun hitting the ground would have made the hammer move forward. This suggests that the gun was cocked after it was dropped and that the victim was, in fact unarmed. It’s physical position also does not corroborate Pratt’s statement. The gun was found behind the victim resting against the cabinet.

With the gun in the victims hand, held threateningly pointed at Mr. Pratt, arm outstretched the gun would be over five feet above the floor and at least 4.5 feet in front of the base of the filing cabinet. The commonwealth attorney took advantage of all these discrepancies during Pratt’s trial. But since there were no witnesses except Pratt, the victims memory of the shooting being destroyed by the trauma of the injury. Pratt’s stepdaughter refused a polygraph test. After a week long trial Pratt was convicted of one count of assault and battery, receiving a fine of $2500 ,no jail sentence.

This case was was to say the least unique. There were many issues exterior to the shooting that were focused on by the defense such as an unfriendly past relationship between the two men. There are many different scenarios possible, but with no solid proof or witnesses a felony conviction was not possible. One of the scenarios that the prosecution concentrated on was as follows. Pratt’s story is accurate as far as I know up to the point of the actual attempted assault by the victim and alleged possession of his gun threatening him. And that possibly while on the phone the victim saw Pratt, go leave the living room and return with a gun, and maybe the victim took possession of the alleged.38 in his own defense observing Jay Pratt approach him armed with the .45. The jury still seemed to have serious concerns of his rights, because he was the owner of the home. The truth may never be known. Judgment was passed. The statute of limitation for this crime in Virginia is two years. No civil case was pursuable. It seems that Pratt and George Zimmerman, both had a lot of options and that deadly force wasn’t necessary. Pratt could of called 911 from his car cell phone instead of getting a gun before any of this had to happen. Deadly force should always be your last resort, not your first.
Stand your ground laws allowed my assailant to ultimately take my life despite the fact that I somehow have lived through it. Both Jay Pratt in Virginia and George Zimmerman in Florida had countless other nonlethal options to have taken to preserve young people’s lives. Trayvon Martin’s or my own culpability in our particular assaults, if any, is neither here nor there & mainly beside the point. At the end of the day Trayvon was an unarmed teenager, and I, a drunk and lovesick 20 year old sailor; both victims to some states’ empowering of their citizens to have absolute discretion in perceived life or death matters where they can be wrong bearing only ultimately tragic results in most cases. And both George Zimmerman and Jay Pratt were allowed to “stand their ground” with no witnesses to corroborate the threat they perceived and barely seem to have to answer for their actions.

• Link
• Report this comment

A Dad

All that narrative about who punched who is nothing but heresay. The only people who knew how things actually went down were Martin and Zimmerman. One person is unavailable to comment on what happened, so that leaves the other person to “tell” the story. Do you honestly think that any person is going to tell a story that leaves them culpable in an incident that ends in somebody getting killed? In any instance, such as this, there are three stories, the victim’s, the perpetrator’s, and somewhere between the two of them lies the truth. Minus one person’s story, we may never get to the truth.

• Link
• Report this comment

Quagmire

What onus does Zimmerman have to provide factual information? I’m not calling Zimmerman’s testimony heresay. I’m referring to all the other mumbo jumbo going around where people, who were not there, are all giving their testimony. Had you read the last two sentences that I posted, you’ll see who’s stories I think would have an actual bearing on the case.

Think about it this way, if you started a fight with someone and you ended up killing that person, would you honestly tell the police that you were the one starting the fight? or would you make something up that made it seem like you were the reaction instead of the action?

• Link
• Report this comment

“George Zimmerman, Son of a Retired Judge, Has 3 Closed Arrests According to a records search on George, he was previously arrested for domestic violence, resisting an officer without violence and most shockingly, resisting an officer with violence — a felony charge that surely could have landed him in prison.

All three of those arrests, however, were mysteriously closed with no semblance of charges for the Florida resident. So how was someone with a violent past including that of battery against an officer able to carry a 9 mm handgun? Maybe that’s a question Robert Zimmerman should answer

George Zimmerman had felony assault on police officer charge in ’05 & 2 domestic assaults”

• Link
• Report this comment

Wow, I vacation in Florida all the time, didnt realize that most people are armed . in Canada
we have more or less banned handguns in the general public (except police).

But I am a supporter of “self defence” … We need to find out “exactly” what happened . if that is possible. who knows??? maybe it was “self defence” ???

I feel safer in a society that is armed to protect both themselves and others. In Canada we have a few nutbars that get a hold of a gun and start shooting everybody and you cant stop them, because they are the only ones with a weapon.

• Link
• Report this comment

What kind of SUV was Zimmermann driving? Was it one saved by the stimulus program offered by the G’ment? Are they guilty?

• Link
• Report this comment

WE DON’T DISARM POLICE, OR REQUIRE THEM TO RETREAT

You obviously don’t know much about police training.

———————

Quagimer

If the lead prosecutor wanted to file charges against Zimmerman based on his testimony vs the evidence he saw, that gives me an idea that Zimmerman’s story isn’t 100% factual. Until it’s proven factual, what else is there to call it?

• Link
• Report this comment

Tom(Independent-Viet Vet)

March 28th, 2012
9:35

My point Tom, is that the proof of a physical altercation is not needed. I could shoot you and say I was preventing you from assaulting me, I was just quicker. And again what person when accosted by an individual on a public street carrying a gun(Zimmerman), doesn’t have the right to defend himself (Trayvon Martin) and in defending himself he may have gotten the upper hand, we don’t know. But what we do know is the one who was being pursued is the one that ended up dead.

Regardless of race this just doesn’t make sense.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bro
Lead investigator (not an attorney) vs the state attorney’s office (attorneys with the knowledge, experience, and requirement to know what is required the charge someone and make it stick). I’ll go with the state attorney’s office.
What will prove his testimony as factual (or not)? A grand jury? I’ll take it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Quagmire

Most investigators get to where they are because they are able to separate the truth from the bs. Not the same for attorneys. It may be occupational bias, but I’ll side with investigators. Our legal system is not geared towards revealing the truth. It’s all about what can be proven. Without the other person’s testimony, a grand jury will be hard pressed to find the truth.

• Link
• Report this comment

Lord Help Us

March 27th, 2012
4:03 pm

‘ I would compel all to carry a gun at all times. Then we would not have to suffer more leftist whining about “bullies.”’

Or, the converse. If Mr. Zimmerman were unarmed, he and the Mr. Martin would be in very different circumstances today.

Take the gun out of the equation and everybody is fine

And you know this how?
First, not you nor me or anyone else on this blog knows the facts…Second, according to Zimmerman and 2 eyewitnesses, Martin hit him in the nose, then jumped on top of him and was slamming his head onto he concrete.
If you dont know, you can kill someone by slamming their head into concrete…so if the facts are as shown, in my my mind Zimmerman was justified, if not then he should go to jail
and he can take Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the Black Panthers with him

• Link
• Report this comment

Brosephus, you dont know the facts so no need to comment on it…if you listen to the 911 tape, the police dispatcher asked if he was following Martin, Zimmerman said yes, the dispatcher told him we dont need you to do that..Zimmerman responded Ok…So we dont know if he continued to follow him or Martin came back after him

• Link
• Report this comment

Tom, your beginning description is exactly where I live. I am in a middle class diverse neighborhood in the East end of Louisville, Kentucky. There are two subdivision adjacent to mine that are less than six years old and mine is ten years old. There were about the same number of burglaries in the subdivision next to mine in just a two month period including where the criminals actually threw a chair through someone’s glass door! The suspects caught on video appeared to be black teenagers. We too have a neighborhood watch program and I believe we all pay attention. We were worried to the point of me turning the alarm system on while I’m at home. But you see, I’m not going to look at young black teenagers any more than anyone else. You can’t put everyone under the same umbrella. If you see suspicious activity, call 911 and report it. Go in your house, car or whatever and wait for the authorities to come. You have no legal ground to approach anyone who is walking through the neighborhood even if that person appears unknown to you. I have family members that live in Geogia and come visit maybe once a year. Putting your logic in place, if someone see’s my relatives walking down the street, they should approach them or call the police! Does that make since to you? I am a martial arts student (blue belt) and have taken many self defense classes. Three rules of self protection are: Awareness, distance and warning. If a person does not heed the warning or approaches me in a threatening way, my responsibility to myself is to do whatever it takes to disable the person so I can get away. We will never know if that is what Trayvon was doing because he is dead!Zimmerman had no authority, no matter how many incidents were in his neighborhood, to approach that boy. According to the spokesperson for Zimmerman, Joe Oliver, the only pictures taken of him was with someone’s cellphone and they have not been able to get them yet. I saw this gentleman say it, so this isn’t hearsay! If he had a broken nose, he would have required medical attention. The hospital would have taken pictures and that info would have been admitted as evidence. His attorney says the gash was so deep that it needed stitches, but since he didn’t do anything about it, it just healed on its own. What?? There will be no ballistics testing because the Prosecutor didn’t allow further investigation. The lead investigator did not believe his story. To compound the situation further, the young man’s body laid in a morgue for three days while his parents frantically searched hospitals, jails and friends and relatives. This case stinks! Something is rotten in the city of Sanford! Trayvon appears to be an average teenager. He may have experimented with marijuana, he may have been around the wrong crowd a time or two. But does all of that warrant a bullet in the chest?

• Link
• Report this comment

In the middle – Regards your comment about not notifying about Trayvon death for several days. All PD’s attempt to notify immediately upon identification. If no ID is found, it takes time to positively ID the deceased. They do not want to make a wrong identification and cause some family tremendous grief. It is a terrible set of circumstances gone wrong. We will never know why the young man struck and attacked Zimm, why was he so angry. Was it because Zimm called the Police or some other reason that he got so upset? I for one do not know?

• Link
• Report this comment

White folks can be victims of race crimes just like Black folks except no one ever protests:

“”Police in Kansas City are investigating a possible hate crime after a 13-year-old boy was doused in gasoline and set on fire. According to Allen Goin’s mother, the attack occurred just as her son was getting home from school. She said, “They rushed him on the porch as he tried to get the door open…one of them poured gasoline, then flicked the Bic and said, ‘This is what you deserve. You get what you deserve white boy The police say the boy was engulfed in a “large fireball,” but was able to beat out the flames to call 911 and his father. In addition to suffering first degree burns, he has lost his eyebrows, eyelashes, and part of the skin on his face. “”

Where is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson???????any Congressional hearings?

• Link
• Report this comment

i think zimmerman forgot the “Watch” in neighborhood watch; they are not officers of the law ; he pursued and ultimately murdered an innocent young boy

• Link
• Report this comment

In the middle- Ma’am – The answer to your question is yes. If my neighborhood had 10 burglaries in 18 months, the whole neighborhood would be on red-alert for suspicious persons and activity. Don’t you think the police has advised the residents of possible suspect descriptions. Seeing someone strange there, yes I would call the police and attempt to delay them from leaving until the police arrived if they appeared to match those descriptions.That is the way most criminals are apprehended not using a crystal ball.. By attempting to delay, I mean talking with them, not threatening nor getting physical. Police(and I know for a fact) do not solve crimes without the assistance of citizens who care about their communities. If this is true, why did Trayvon attack that man for trying to delay him until the police arrived. If Zimmerman tried to delay Trayvon by being physical he was wrong, and will have to answer to the law! But none of that is an excuse to bash a man’s head into the pavement in an attempt to kill him or cause serious bodily harm. Sorry ma’am, if you are expecting the police to do everything for you, you will be disappointed!

• Link
• Report this comment

I am white but I must say, life must be good when you are son of a judge

I am sure he knew about the law, and if not, perhaps he made a call to his father, the Judge Zimmerman. The police checked Martin for drugs and performed a background check on him but not on Zimmerman. The police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of his head and Zimmerman’s lawyer has said Zimmerman had a serious gash that required stitches as well as a broken nose. The lead investigator wanted to charge Zimmerman, higher ups made a call to not charge him. Hard to believe Zimmerman really felt threatened by the “f*king coon” he gunned down. When will people get honest about racism, profiling and the criminalization of young black men?

It is hard to believe that my humanity comes because I grew up around blacks. Are the masses of my people really this prejudiced? Why are people defending Zimmerman? Trayvon Martin, Ramarley Graham, Sean Bell, Amudu Diallo, and the countless list goes on.

Zimmerman overstepped authority

It would be ludicrous to suggest that Trayvon Martin had no right to be walking on a public street in the USA.

In his 911 call, Zimmerman never established any foundation for his assertion of suspicious behavior, other than that Martin was black and wearing a hoodie.

As a watch volunteer, Zimmerman had no authority to confront, or detain. His only function was to watch and report anything illegal. As a watch volunteer, he needed to comply after being told his engagement was no longer necessary. By asserting unwarranted authority he confronted, harassed and intimidated a U.S. citizen, denying Martin his civil right. Zimmerman provoked a confrontation knowing he could win with his 9 mm handgun.

We hear Zimmerman’s defenders speculating that Martin should have explained himself to this enforcement wannabe; however, Martin had no reason or obligation to do so. Defenders speak of Zimmerman’s injury supposedly inflicted by Martin who was much smaller and, more importantly, unarmed. How do we know that Zimmerman wasn’t bested in a previous altercation and was seeking retribution? Martin can’t explain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2mjvFNOwmc

• Link
• Report this comment

Tom(Independent-Viet Vet)

March 28th, 2012
2:39 pm

Now we have video showing Zimmerman clean and without bruises. Once again Tom the only version of this story is the one being told by the killer. This is all suspect because he is the prime suspect in the murder. What we do know is that he pursued a young Black male disregarding police instructions telling him not to do that. He was in possession of a weapon. He at some point got out of the safety of his vehicle and confronted the young man with his weapon and shot him. At what point does a child being pursued by an adult with a hand gun not have the right to stand his ground in self defense?

This doesn’t have to be a Black or white issue but it has taken that context due to the blatant disregard for the facts that surround the event. Zimmerman’s version has too many holes in it to not to have resulted in his arrest and to have let this be decided by a jury after review of the facts and circumstances.

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] the law, but law enforcement officials who investigated the matter should have known better that the law was inapplicable to the case. Florida Gov. Rick Scott has been condemned for being slow to take an interest in the [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

Willie Lynch@8:20 – Some good counter points, enjoy speaking with you. All I want is the truth, do not care if person is black, white, yellow or brown My key point, if Zimm can not prove his head was being bashed into pavement, he has got some serious problems! That action does justify deadly force, not exchanged words or fistfight! I saw video of him going into police station handcuffed also last nite. Police procedure requires anyone being transported in back seat of patrol car to PD for questioning be handcuffed for officer safety. As far as no visible injury being observed on video, if paramedics came to initial scene(most likely occurred), there is a good chance they or the police wiped blood from Zimmerman prior to him being placed in back seat of patrol car. As retired law enforcement, I’ve never allowed anyone bleeding in back seat of police cruiser. If bleeding or injuried they would have to go to hospital first. Of course they could decline medial treatment for alledged injuries if they wished.Blood could have some contamination in it and would be harmful to officers and others placed in rear of cruiser a later date.That would be standard police procedure. Did initial officers on scene see blood and injuries would be the question to be answered. I thought they said in initial report they observed it, is that right or wrong, I do not know? Zimm’s father said on TV that Trayvon was going around back of homes and the 911 operator asked for address to send PD. His father further stated that Zimm continued in direction where young man was going to get address for 911, he did not know where he was exactly. Apparently the street address for the complex must have been insufficient for whatever reason. I have one big question – did Trayvon’s father(who he was going home to) live in that gated community or was Trayvon just cutting thru at back of properties?? This is just a difference of opinion, but a 17 yr old young man(6 ft tall) is not a child by my standards. I, for one, was not a child at 17 when I entered the military. If Zimm and his father are being truthful they are on solid ground, if they are telling lies or 1/2 truths, they could be in some serious trouble with the law!

• Link
• Report this comment