• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin[W;164]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Objective Voice

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
12,994
Reaction score
5,732
Location
Huntsville, AL (USA)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I've made it a point to keep a low profile concerning this Zimmerman/Martin case until more evidence came forward. According to MSN.com, an affidavidt was filed by the procecuting attorneys indicating that Zimmerman pursued Martin and confronted him, thus provoking the attack which led to Martin's death. If the allegations are true, I don't see Zimmerman being found not guilty for taking this young man's life.

You can read the affidavit here.

One thing the affidavit does make clear: Trayvon Martin was living (or more accurately visiting one of his parents; the affidavit doesn't make clear whether it was his mother or father) in the gated community Zimmerman believed him to be "casing" for a potential home invasion. The irony here is according to the affidavit, Zimmerman lived there, too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Interesting bit about Martin's mother identifying the screams.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

I've made it a point to keep a low profile concerning this Zimmerman/Martin case until more evidence came forward. According to MSN.com, an affidavidt was filed by the procecuting attorneys indicating that Zimmerman pursued Martin and confronted him, thus provoking the attack which led to Martin's death. If the allegations are true, I don't see Zimmerman being found not guilty for taking this young man's life.

You can read the affidavit here.

Interesting....Zimmerman "profiled" Martin. That's perjorative, and I think they're going to have a hard time proving that. "He assumed Martin was a criminal." I wonder who's assuming with that statement. Reporting a suspicious person does not mean he automatically assumed he was a criminal. He assumed he was a suspicious person. There's a difference. "Zimmerman confronted Martin." Good luck proving that with the evidence we know about. While it says that Trayvon's mother identified the cries for help as coming from her son, we know of another witness who said it was Zimmerman yelling. Hmmmm.

Very interesting. Sounds like a spin.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Interesting....Zimmerman "profiled" Martin. That's perjorative, and I think they're going to have a hard time proving that. "He assumed Martin was a criminal." I wonder who's assuming with that statement. Reporting a suspicious person does not mean he automatically assumed he was a criminal. He assumed he was a suspicious person. There's a difference. "Zimmerman confronted Martin." Good luck proving that with the evidence we know about. While it says that Trayvon's mother identified the cries for help as coming from her son, we know of another witness who said it was Zimmerman yelling. Hmmmm.

Very interesting. Sounds like a spin.

Context is important. While Zimmerman is pursuing Martin, he says "These assholes get away with everything", and also says "****ing punk". That told the prosecutor that Zimmerman was indeed illegally profiling Martin. But don't take my word for it. It's in the prosecutor's affidavit, which I linked to in the other thread.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Interesting....Zimmerman "profiled" Martin. That's perjorative, and I think they're going to have a hard time proving that. "He assumed Martin was a criminal." I wonder who's assuming with that statement. Reporting a suspicious person does not mean he automatically assumed he was a criminal. He assumed he was a suspicious person. There's a difference. "Zimmerman confronted Martin." Good luck proving that with the evidence we know about. While it says that Trayvon's mother identified the cries for help as coming from her son, we know of another witness who said it was Zimmerman yelling. Hmmmm.

Very interesting. Sounds like a spin.

MaggieD,

I'd buy your argument except you're forgetting one key point.

Per the 911 transcript and the affidavit, Zimmerman clearly stated to the 911 dispatcher, "these assholes; they always get away". By that very statement, at the very least Zimmerman assumed Trayvon was up to no good. He may not have assumed Trayvon was a criminal, but he certainly assumed he was in the housing development to commit a criminal act.

Suspecious person...? Yes, but it's one thing to think that someone is somewhere they shouldn't be because you consider something to be odd or out of place about him/her. It's another to jump to an instant conclusion that said person is up to no good and all you have to go by is his appearance. As such, Zimmerman did, in fact, profile Trayvon Martin. I don't think you can come to any other conclusion based on how events unfolded.

Now, just to play Devil's Advocate, let's recap what we do know base on media reports, eyewitness testimony ("John" and Mary Cutcher), the 911 transcript and the affidavit.

We know that there was a recent rash of burglaries in the neighborhood where Zimmerman lived.

We know that Zimmerman is been a member of a neighborhood watch group that patrolled the gated community where the shooting took place. (How long and how experienced hasn't been firmly establish, thus, is up for debate).

We know that Zimmerman took particular notice of someone who looked suspecious walking through his neighborhood presumably a Black teen wearing a dark hoodie.

We know that it was dark and raining out that night.

We know that Trayvon was walking "home" alone that night (again, I'm not sure if the home he was visiting was his mother's or father's) from the store during half-time of a NCAA college basketball game during March Madness.

We know that Zimmerman carried a concealled weapon towhich he had a permit and license to carry.

We know that per Neighborhood Watch rules Zimmerman was not suppose to be carrying a gun while on patrol.

We know that Trayvon only had a drink and candy on his person when the assault and subsequent gunfire took place.

We know that Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Trayvon even after being asked not to do so by 911 dispatcher.

We know that Trayvon was concerned for who was following him and called his girlfriend and discussed events with her in real time.

We know that Trayvon dawned his "hoodie" and initially ran in an effort to elude his persuer. For a brief moment, Trayvon did elude Zimmerman, but a few moments later Zimmerman spotted him again.

It's at this point where things (for me) get sketchy...

According to the 911 transcript, Zimmerman mentioned that Trayvon was approaching him and that he had his hands in his waistband. But this was after Zimmerman was told by the 911 dispatcher not to continue following Trayvon. Zimmerman also informs the 911 dispatcher that Trayvon had something in his hands. That "something" his cellphone according to testimony from Trayvon's girlfriend. Remember: He had her on the phone up until the assault took place.

The affidavit states that Zimmerman confronted Trayvon. But according to testimony from Trayvons' girlfriend, it would apper that Trayvon verbally confront Zimmerman first asking him "What are you following me for?," towhich Zimmerman replied, "What are you doing here?". This is where the physical confrontation ensued.

According to "John", the man in dark attire (presumably Trayvon) was on top while the man in the red sweater (presumably was Zimmerman) was on the bottom. We know based on Zimmerman's conversation w/911 dispatcher that Trayvon was wearing a dark hoodie. John went inside his home to call police (911) but when he looked outside his window the man wearing the red sweater was now on top and the man in the dark attire was presumably dead. According to testimony from Mary Cutcher, she and her roommate both saw Zimmerman "straddling the body, basically a foot on both sides of Trayvon's body, and his hands pressed on his back."

When discussing the cried for help she and her roommate heard, Mary Cutcher stated, “It sounded young. It didn’t sound like a grown man is my point. It sounded to me like someone was in distress and it wasn’t like a crying, sobbing boo-hoo, it was a definite whine."

Cutcher added that Zimmerman told her and her roommate to call the police. "Zimmerman never turned him over or tried to help him or CPR or anything."

If events turn out to be anywhere near as outlined above - and I remind the readers the above summary is based on the 911 transcript, eyewitness testimony and testimony from Trayvon's girlfriend during their cellphone conversation leading up to the assault that ensued - odds are Zimmerman will be convicted of murder in the 2nd degree.

He assumed Trayvon was somewhere where he didn't belong.

He assumed Trayvon "was up to no good" based both on his attire (dark hoodie) and the fact that Trayvon was "standing and looking around". Little did Zimmerman know that Trayvon was talking with his girlfriend about events as they occurred and that he initially ran to elude his pursuer.

He assumed Trayvon was coming after him. He stated such himself.

He assumed Trayvon would do him bodily harm. You get that impression from the fact that: 1) Zimmerman stated that Trayvon was looking at him, 2) that Zimmerman was concerned about the placement of Trayvon's hands in his waistband, and 3) that Trayvon had something in his hands.

Unless it can be proven that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman first as I mentioned in this thread - whether it was because he was upset that Zimmerman was following him for no apparant reason (he hadn't done anything up to that point) and Zimmerman's defensive tone (Re: "Why are you here?") - it's going to be very difficult to prove that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

cherrypickedfromObjectiveVoice said:
We know that per Neighborhood Watch rules Zimmerman was not suppose to be carrying a gun while on patrol.

This one is not going to go well for Zimmerman in court.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

We know that Trayvon was walking "home" alone that night (again, I'm not sure if the home he was visiting was his mother's or father's) from the store during half-time of a NCAA college basketball game during March Madness.

It was his fathers girlfiends house.

We know that per Neighborhood Watch rules Zimmerman was not suppose to be carrying a gun while on patrol.

We do not know that. Not at all.

We know that Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Trayvon even after being asked not to do so by 911 dispatcher.

This is also not true. Zimmerman was already out of his vehicle and following Martin when that part of the conversation took place. He did not leave his vehicle and follow after that. He actually lost Martin and was returning to his vehicle at the end of the call.
Unless it can be proven that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman first as I mentioned in this thread (Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman) - whether it was because he was upset that Zimmerman was following him for no apparant reason (he hadn't done anything up to that point) and Zimmerman's defensive tone (Re: "Why are you here?") - it's going to be very difficult to prove that Zimmerman acted in self defense.

Zimmerman does not have to prove self defense. He only has to provide some evidence to support his claim. Which his injuries, and witness statement provide evidence. It is the prosecutions responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not act in self defense. I think that unless the prosecution can prove that Zimmerman started the fight, or that martin was retreating when the shots were fired that it will be hard for them to disprove his claim of self defense. Which is what is legally required.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Again, the sketchy part of this case is who assaulted whom first. As things stand, I'd think that the presecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did have hostile intent. His statments, i.e., "they always get away with this" and "Why are you here?," plus the fact that he automatically assumed a defensive attitude first in noticing that Trayvon had his hands in his wasitband (nothing wrong with that; could be argued that Zimmerman was merely very observant, but it could also be assumed that Zimmerman though Trayvon might have a weapon of some sort on his person) and then questioning what Trayvon was carrying (his cell phone).

The presecution could easily present motive on these facts alone, that being that Zimmerman had already made up his mind that "'they' weren't going to get away with it (burlerizing another home in his neighborhood on his watch) this time".

Playing Devils' Advocate again, many people believe that Trayvon reached for Zimmerman's gun during the struggle. Well, who wouldn't if they notice that someone they're in a physical altercation with had a gun on them? Of course, Zimmerman could always make that argument, that Trayvon went for his weapon (which I believe he already has made that claim), but I question the validity of that claim. Again, we have the 911 transcript, as well as, John the witness' testimony.

John states the person in the dark attire was on top when he saw the fight prior to going into his home to call 911. Trayvon apparently had the upper hand over Zimmerman. But John never states in his testimony that he saw a gun. So, I ask how does Trayvon go from beating Zimmerman about the face and pounding his head into the ground to reaching for Zimmerman's weapon? Trayvon's hands are busy "beating" Zimmerman with his fists. Moreover, it takes both hands to fully grasp a person by the head in order to pound it into the ground. How does Trayvon go from "beating" Zimmerman mercilessly to reaching for Zimmerman's gun?

Also, we have to remember that although Trayvon initially had the upper hand in the fight, Zimmerman somehow turned the tied and gained the advantage. Returning to John's testimony, he clearly states that when he looked outside his bedroom window again while calling 911, he noticed that the "man in the red sweater was now on top". Furthermore, Mary Cuther also states in her testimony that after she and her roomate heard the gun shot, they saw Zimmerman "straddling the body, basically a foot on both sides of Trayvon's body". How then does someone who has the upper hand in a fight reach the conclusion that his life was in danger?

Unless Trayvon somehow got ahold of Zimmerman's weapon at some point after Zimmerman gained the upper hand, it is very difficult to believe that Trayvon was going to kill him with his hands and fist alone. And then we have the video footage from the police station after Zimmerman was taken into custody that doesn't show that Zimmerman sustain any life-threatening injuries, particularly on the back of his head. Pause the video at the 1:09 mark and take a really good look at the back of Zimmerman's head. Where are the injuries that should be there if someone had their head pounded repeatedly against the ground in a violent manner as Zimmerman claims Trayvon did to him? He stands in place for a good 6 seconds, long enough to get a good look.

There are atleast 3 different frontal shots of Zimmerman's face throughout the video. None are very clear shots, but in the 3rd facial shot around the 3:35 mark you can see from a profile shot that Zimmerman doesn't have bandages on his face. If he had a broken nose, wouldn't you expect to see:

a) bruising

b) a gash and/or evidence of bleeding

c) a bandage on his nose

Nothing...

Now, just to be fair, there's also enhanced video footage from CNN showing close-ups of the back of Zimmerman's head. They conclude that Zimmerman might have sustained some sort of injury to the back of his head. How it happend they don't speculate, but they do agree that Zimmerman does have a bump on the back of his head.

Granted, Zimmerman clearly received medical care upon being taken into custody, but if you've ever seen anyone of light complextion get hit in the face, you'll note they bruise easy especially from a broken nose. Moreover, usually their eyes are blacken. Where's such tail-tale signs on Zimmerman? Other than some serious icing, routine medical wouldn't clear up bruising.
 
Last edited:
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

This one is not going to go well for Zimmerman in court.

Why? If the other party has the intent, opportunity, and the ability to cause great bodily harm or death, you are approved (and expected) to use lawful legal force to stop the threat.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Context is important. While Zimmerman is pursuing Martin, he says "These assholes get away with everything", and also says "****ing punk". That told the prosecutor that Zimmerman was indeed illegally profiling Martin. But don't take my word for it. It's in the prosecutor's affidavit, which I linked to in the other thread.

How would profiling come in to it with the words asshole and punk? What was he profiling the other guy to be?
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

MaggieD,

I'd buy your argument except you're forgetting one key point.

Per the 911 transcript and the affidavit, Zimmerman clearly stated to the 911 dispatcher, "these assholes; they always get away". By that very statement, at the very least Zimmerman assumed Trayvon was up to no good. He may not have assumed Trayvon was a criminal, but he certainly assumed he was in the housing development to commit a criminal act.

Suspecious person...? Yes, but it's one thing to think that someone is somewhere they shouldn't be because you consider something to be odd or out of place about him/her. It's another to jump to an instant conclusion that said person is up to no good and all you have to go by is his appearance. As such, Zimmerman did, in fact, profile Trayvon Martin. I don't think you can come to any other conclusion based on how events unfolded.

Now, just to play Devil's Advocate, let's recap what we do know base on media reports, eyewitness testimony ("John" and Mary Cutcher), the 911 transcript and the affidavit.

We know that there was a recent rash of burglaries in the neighborhood where Zimmerman lived.

We know that Zimmerman is been a member of a neighborhood watch group that patrolled the gated community where the shooting took place. (How long and how experienced hasn't been firmly establish, thus, is up for debate).

We know that Zimmerman took particular notice of someone who looked suspecious walking through his neighborhood presumably a Black teen wearing a dark hoodie.

We know that it was dark and raining out that night.

We know that Trayvon was walking "home" alone that night (again, I'm not sure if the home he was visiting was his mother's or father's) from the store during half-time of a NCAA college basketball game during March Madness.

We know that Zimmerman carried a concealled weapon towhich he had a permit and license to carry.

We know that per Neighborhood Watch rules Zimmerman was not suppose to be carrying a gun while on patrol.

We know that Trayvon only had a drink and candy on his person when the assault and subsequent gunfire took place.

We know that Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Trayvon even after being asked not to do so by 911 dispatcher.

We know that Trayvon was concerned for who was following him and called his girlfriend and discussed events with her in real time.

We know that Trayvon dawned his "hoodie" and initially ran in an effort to elude his persuer. For a brief moment, Trayvon did elude Zimmerman, but a few moments later Zimmerman spotted him again.

It's at this point where things (for me) get sketchy...

According to the 911 transcript, Zimmerman mentioned that Trayvon was approaching him and that he had his hands in his waistband. But this was after Zimmerman was told by the 911 dispatcher not to continue following Trayvon. Zimmerman also informs the 911 dispatcher that Trayvon had something in his hands. That "something" his cellphone according to testimony from Trayvon's girlfriend. Remember: He had her on the phone up until the assault took place.

The affidavit states that Zimmerman confronted Trayvon. But according to testimony from Trayvons' girlfriend, it would apper that Trayvon verbally confront Zimmerman first asking him "What are you following me for?," towhich Zimmerman replied, "What are you doing here?". This is where the physical confrontation ensued.

According to "John", the man in dark attire (presumably Trayvon) was on top while the man in the red sweater (presumably was Zimmerman) was on the bottom. We know based on Zimmerman's conversation w/911 dispatcher that Trayvon was wearing a dark hoodie. John went inside his home to call police (911) but when he looked outside his window the man wearing the red sweater was now on top and the man in the dark attire was presumably dead. According to testimony from Mary Cutcher, she and her roommate both saw Zimmerman "straddling the body, basically a foot on both sides of Trayvon's body, and his hands pressed on his back."

When discussing the cried for help she and her roommate heard, Mary Cutcher stated, “It sounded young. It didn’t sound like a grown man is my point. It sounded to me like someone was in distress and it wasn’t like a crying, sobbing boo-hoo, it was a definite whine."

Cutcher added that Zimmerman told her and her roommate to call the police. "Zimmerman never turned him over or tried to help him or CPR or anything."

If events turn out to be anywhere near as outlined above - and I remind the readers the above summary is based on the 911 transcript, eyewitness testimony and testimony from Trayvon's girlfriend during their cellphone conversation leading up to the assault that ensued - odds are Zimmerman will be convicted of murder in the 2nd degree.

He assumed Trayvon was somewhere where he didn't belong.

He assumed Trayvon "was up to no good" based both on his attire (dark hoodie) and the fact that Trayvon was "standing and looking around". Little did Zimmerman know that Trayvon was talking with his girlfriend about events as they occurred and that he initially ran to elude his pursuer.

He assumed Trayvon was coming after him. He stated such himself.

He assumed Trayvon would do him bodily harm. You get that impression from the fact that: 1) Zimmerman stated that Trayvon was looking at him, 2) that Zimmerman was concerned about the placement of Trayvon's hands in his waistband, and 3) that Trayvon had something in his hands.

Unless it can be proven that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman first as I mentioned in this thread - whether it was because he was upset that Zimmerman was following him for no apparant reason (he hadn't done anything up to that point) and Zimmerman's defensive tone (Re: "Why are you here?") - it's going to be very difficult to prove that Zimmerman acted in self defense.

Keep in mind this is not just a neighborhood but a gated community where only authorized people are allowed to be.

Zimmerman did not recognize Martin and thought he was there for another purpose other than a lawful one. I can see that happening since there had been a string of break ins lately.

What would youthink in that same situation?
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Why? If the other party has the intent, opportunity, and the ability to cause great bodily harm or death, you are approved (and expected) to use lawful legal force to stop the threat.

That there gives the right to Martin to defend himself against someone first chasing him in a vehicle and then on foot while armed. Damn straight, Martin had a right to try to fight this menace off.

Zimmerman is not an uniformed policeman or in a police car. This guy comes after you with a gun you have to make a quick decision. It is hard to outrun bullets.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Keep in mind this is not just a neighborhood but a gated community where only authorized people are allowed to be.

Zimmerman did not recognize Martin and thought he was there for another purpose other than a lawful one. I can see that happening since there had been a string of break ins lately.

What would youthink in that same situation?

In that same situation, I would assume that an individual I don't recognize acting strangely wearing similar attire that resembles that of other perpetrators of home invasions might be in my neighborhood to commit mayhem as well. But here's where Zimmerman and I differ...

When confronted, I would have explained why I was keeping a close watch on him. Zimmerman didn't do that. He could have defused the situation at the moment where he was asked by Trayvon, "Why are you following me?" Instead, he choose to go on the defensive. That was his mistake.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

That there gives the right to Martin to defend himself against someone first chasing him in a vehicle and then on foot while armed. Damn straight, Martin had a right to try to fight this menace off.

Zimmerman is not an uniformed policeman or in a police car. This guy comes after you with a gun you have to make a quick decision. It is hard to outrun bullets.

Here, you're jumping to conclusions. There is no evidence that Zimmerman followed Trayvon into the housing complex. The 911 transcript actually gives a different perspective. Per Zimmerman's account, he was already parked inside the housing complex and Trayvon was already on the housing grounds.

Now, granted the 911 transcript doesn't make clear that Zimmerman noticed Trayvon off the grounds and followed him onto the housing development property, but if that does prove to be the case, then it IS stalking and Zimmerman DID provoke the attack. By default, his neighborhood, i.e., "patrol area," is the housing development only. Therefore, if Zimmerman did follow Trayvon onto the property from the street leading into the housing development, Zimmerman was clearly in the wrong from the start.

But again, there is no evidence that I've read to support this claim.
 
Last edited:
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

In that same situation, I would assume that an individual I don't recognize acting strangely wearing similar attire that resembles that of other perpetrators of home invasions might be in my neighborhood to commit mayhem as well. But here's where Zimmerman and I differ...

When confronted, I would have explained why I was keeping a close watch on him. Zimmerman didn't do that. He could have defused the situation at the moment where he was asked by Trayvon, "Why are you following me?" Instead, he choose to go on the defensive. That was his mistake.

We don't know what happened when Zimmerman confronted him. This is what I would like to know.

If Martin attacked him on his way back to his vehicle, then Zimmerman asked Martin and was satisfied with the answer then the attack happened.

We need to wait until the evidence comes out to see what actually happened.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Keep in mind this is not just a neighborhood but a gated community where only authorized people are allowed to be.

Zimmerman did not recognize Martin and thought he was there for another purpose other than a lawful one. I can see that happening since there had been a string of break ins lately.

What would youthink in that same situation?

Define "authorized" and the manner in which authorization and verification took place. Also, provide proof of posted procedures for authorization.

Thanks in advance.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Define "authorized" and the manner in which authorization and verification took place. Also, provide proof of posted procedures for authorization.

Thanks in advance.

I don't need to prove anything, that will come out in the court of law.

Do you think they call it a gated community for the hell of it? A gate implies a gaurd of some kind authorizing entry.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Interesting bit about Martin's mother identifying the screams.
Why do you find that interesting?
I would think most parents, if their son was involved in such an event, would believe that the high pitched wail was their son's.
Unfortunately an eye-witness says the crys for help belonged to Zimmerman. Which makes the affidavit dumbfounding.
Additionally, when Trayvon's Father initially heard the recording of the screams, he said they were not his son's.




MaggieD,

I'd buy your argument except you're forgetting one key point.

Per the 911 transcript and the affidavit, Zimmerman clearly stated to the 911 dispatcher, "these assholes; they always get away". By that very statement, at the very least Zimmerman assumed Trayvon was up to no good. He may not have assumed Trayvon was a criminal, but he certainly assumed he was in the housing development to commit a criminal act.

Suspecious person...? Yes, but it's one thing to think that someone is somewhere they shouldn't be because you consider something to be odd or out of place about him/her. It's another to jump to an instant conclusion that said person is up to no good and all you have to go by is his appearance. As such, Zimmerman did, in fact, profile Trayvon Martin. I don't think you can come to any other conclusion based on how events unfolded.

Now, just to play Devil's Advocate, let's recap what we do know base on media reports, eyewitness testimony ("John" and Mary Cutcher), the 911 transcript and the affidavit.

We know that there was a recent rash of burglaries in the neighborhood where Zimmerman lived.

We know that Zimmerman is been a member of a neighborhood watch group that patrolled the gated community where the shooting took place. (How long and how experienced hasn't been firmly establish, thus, is up for debate).

We know that Zimmerman took particular notice of someone who looked suspecious walking through his neighborhood presumably a Black teen wearing a dark hoodie.

We know that it was dark and raining out that night.

We know that Trayvon was walking "home" alone that night (again, I'm not sure if the home he was visiting was his mother's or father's) from the store during half-time of a NCAA college basketball game during March Madness.

We know that Zimmerman carried a concealled weapon towhich he had a permit and license to carry.

We know that per Neighborhood Watch rules Zimmerman was not suppose to be carrying a gun while on patrol.

We know that Trayvon only had a drink and candy on his person when the assault and subsequent gunfire took place.

We know that Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Trayvon even after being asked not to do so by 911 dispatcher.

We know that Trayvon was concerned for who was following him and called his girlfriend and discussed events with her in real time.

We know that Trayvon dawned his "hoodie" and initially ran in an effort to elude his persuer. For a brief moment, Trayvon did elude Zimmerman, but a few moments later Zimmerman spotted him again.

It's at this point where things (for me) get sketchy...

According to the 911 transcript, Zimmerman mentioned that Trayvon was approaching him and that he had his hands in his waistband. But this was after Zimmerman was told by the 911 dispatcher not to continue following Trayvon. Zimmerman also informs the 911 dispatcher that Trayvon had something in his hands. That "something" his cellphone according to testimony from Trayvon's girlfriend. Remember: He had her on the phone up until the assault took place.

The affidavit states that Zimmerman confronted Trayvon. But according to testimony from Trayvons' girlfriend, it would apper that Trayvon verbally confront Zimmerman first asking him "What are you following me for?," towhich Zimmerman replied, "What are you doing here?". This is where the physical confrontation ensued.

According to "John", the man in dark attire (presumably Trayvon) was on top while the man in the red sweater (presumably was Zimmerman) was on the bottom. We know based on Zimmerman's conversation w/911 dispatcher that Trayvon was wearing a dark hoodie. John went inside his home to call police (911) but when he looked outside his window the man wearing the red sweater was now on top and the man in the dark attire was presumably dead. According to testimony from Mary Cutcher, she and her roommate both saw Zimmerman "straddling the body, basically a foot on both sides of Trayvon's body, and his hands pressed on his back."

When discussing the cried for help she and her roommate heard, Mary Cutcher stated, “It sounded young. It didn’t sound like a grown man is my point. It sounded to me like someone was in distress and it wasn’t like a crying, sobbing boo-hoo, it was a definite whine."

Cutcher added that Zimmerman told her and her roommate to call the police. "Zimmerman never turned him over or tried to help him or CPR or anything."

If events turn out to be anywhere near as outlined above - and I remind the readers the above summary is based on the 911 transcript, eyewitness testimony and testimony from Trayvon's girlfriend during their cellphone conversation leading up to the assault that ensued - odds are Zimmerman will be convicted of murder in the 2nd degree.

He assumed Trayvon was somewhere where he didn't belong.

He assumed Trayvon "was up to no good" based both on his attire (dark hoodie) and the fact that Trayvon was "standing and looking around". Little did Zimmerman know that Trayvon was talking with his girlfriend about events as they occurred and that he initially ran to elude his pursuer.

He assumed Trayvon was coming after him. He stated such himself.

He assumed Trayvon would do him bodily harm. You get that impression from the fact that: 1) Zimmerman stated that Trayvon was looking at him, 2) that Zimmerman was concerned about the placement of Trayvon's hands in his waistband, and 3) that Trayvon had something in his hands.

Unless it can be proven that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman first as I mentioned in this thread - whether it was because he was upset that Zimmerman was following him for no apparant reason (he hadn't done anything up to that point) and Zimmerman's defensive tone (Re: "Why are you here?") - it's going to be very difficult to prove that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
Your narrative has too many inaccuracies and irrelevant info.
Too many to try and correct.
So your opinion is founded on fallacy.

You may still have the same opinion after correcting them and eliminating the irrelevant info, but at least it would be an opinion founded on accurate info.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Why do you find that interesting?
I would think most parents, if their son was involved in such an event, would believe that the high pitched wail was their son's.
Unfortunately an eye-witness says the crys for help belonged to Zimmerman. Which makes the affidavit dumbfounding.
Additionally, when Trayvon's Father initially heard the recording of the screams, he said they were not his son's.




Your narrative has too many inaccuracies and irrelevant info.
Too many to try and correct.
So your opinion is founded on fallacy.

You may still have the same opinion after correcting them and eliminating the irrelevant info, but at least it would be an opinion founded on accurate info.

You post a lot of previously unheard of tidbits of info about this case and never post links.

So if you don't mind, proof that Martin's father said it wasn't him on the recording?
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

That there gives the right to Martin to defend himself against someone first chasing him in a vehicle and then on foot while armed. Damn straight, Martin had a right to try to fight this menace off.

No, The best way to avoid this uncertainty is to take "Take the Monty Python advice; 'run away, run away.'"
Zimmerman is not an uniformed policeman or in a police car.

So, what? The common man has a right to defend himself regardless, the profession

This guy comes after you with a gun you have to make a quick decision. It is hard to outrun bullets.

Who told you that? I'm so over the liberal press and their bull****
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

You post a lot of previously unheard of tidbits of info about this case and never post links.

So if you don't mind, proof that Martin's father said it wasn't him on the recording?
Dear, I have always provided links when I initially state the information.
I just don't repeatedly give them when providing the info over, and over, and over, again.



Sanford police detectives claimed:
It was prosecutors who advised them there was not enough evidence to win a manslaughter conviction.
Lead detective played recording of screams for help and [highlight]Martin's Father said voice on 911 call was not his son's.[/highlight]

Sanford Police Speak Out In Trayvon Martin Case - Yahoo! News
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Why do you find that interesting?
I would think most parents, if their son was involved in such an event, would believe that the high pitched wail was their son's.
Unfortunately an eye-witness says the crys for help belonged to Zimmerman. Which makes the affidavit dumbfounding.
Additionally, when Trayvon's Father initially heard the recording of the screams, he said they were not his son's.




Your narrative has too many inaccuracies and irrelevant info.
Too many to try and correct.
So your opinion is founded on fallacy.

You may still have the same opinion after correcting them and eliminating the irrelevant info, but at least it would be an opinion founded on accurate info.

Wow, you just don't care about the facts at all, do you? Remember the audio experts concluding with near 100% accuracy that the screams heard on the 911 call were not George Zimmerman? It doesn't seem a bit absurd to you at this point that your sticking to the "Zimmerman was screaming" approach? Also, the way you have portrayed the events, Zimmerman lost Martin and then Martin came up and ambushed Zimmerman. How do you account for Martin's girlfriend saying that she was on the phone with Trayvon and they were speaking as he was being followed, and she heard the beginning of their confrontation before the phone cut out? How exactly would George Zimmerman "lose" a person who is continuously talking to his girlfriend on the phone? Are you asserting that Zimmerman is deaf? I'm really glad you're here on the forum, since you obviously know something that the police and special investigators do not. It's fantastic to have somebody here who can definitively tell us things that are not proven or known. And furthermore, it's wonderful that you are able to tell anybody who doesn't agree with you that their opinion is of no relevance. It really improves the conversation because all we need to do is listen to you and ignore everything else. And it's great that you are able to tell us that martin's girlfriend's word is irrelevant, one witness account is irrelevant, the other witness account is 100% accurate, and police reports are inherently flawless, while the word of the special prosecutor is entirely based on pressure from the media. It's amazing because you're the only person in the world who knows all of this, and we're lucky enough to have you available on our forum almost all day. You're psychic, right? Sorry, don't mean to out you, but hey, obviously there's no other way you could know all of this stuff.
 
Last edited:
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

Wow, you just don't care about the facts at all, do you? Remember the audio experts concluding with near 100% accuracy that the screams heard on the 911 call were not George Zimmerman? It doesn't seem a bit absurd to you at this point that your sticking to the "Zimmerman was screaming" approach? Also, the way you have portrayed the events, Zimmerman lost Martin and then Martin came up and ambushed Zimmerman. How do you account for Martin's girlfriend saying that she was on the phone with Trayvon and they were speaking as he was being followed, and she heard the beginning of their confrontation before the phone cut out? How exactly would George Zimmerman "lose" a person who is continuously talking to his girlfriend on the phone? Are you asserting that Zimmerman is deaf? I'm really glad you're here on the forum, since you obviously know something that the police and special investigators do not. It's fantastic to have somebody here who can definitively tell us things that are not proven or known. And furthermore, it's wonderful that you are able to tell anybody who doesn't agree with you that their opinion is of no relevance. It really improves the conversation because all we need to do is listen to you and ignore everything else. And it's great that you are able to tell us that martin's girlfriend's word is irrelevant, one witness account is irrelevant, the other witness account is 100% accurate, and police reports are inherently flawless, while the word of the special prosecutor is entirely based on pressure from the media. It's amazing because you're the only person in the world who knows all of this, and we're lucky enough to have you available on our forum almost all day. You're psychic, right? Sorry, don't mean to out you, but hey, obviously there's no other way you could know all of this stuff.

What do you want him to do? To stop trying to confuse the issue with facts, common sense and reason?
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

What do you want him to do? To stop trying to confuse the issue with facts, common sense and reason?

That's an excellent approach if your goal is to ignore everything i said and pretend that the facts are on his side for the sole purpose of maintaining the "upper hand" in the argument. The "facts are on my side" argument, along with the "i don't have to respond to you because you're wrong" approach are all classic signs of somebody arguing something that they know absolutely nothing about.
 
Re: Prosecutors content George Zimmerman provoked confrontation w/Trayvon Martin

How would profiling come in to it with the words asshole and punk? What was he profiling the other guy to be?

Oh I don't know... what do assholes get away with? Farting? Maybe he thought Martin was a serial farter. Maybe a serial diarrhea crook? Yes. That's it. Zimmerman thought Martin was a serial diarrhea-ist. He goes around taking ****s in people's gardens and getting away with it. :roll:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom