Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[fishbob]

When the person you follow ends up dead from a gunshot, you are not doing it right.

Although it does make pointing them out to the police pretty easy.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Unless you're saying that self-defense should be the default assumption, which seems quite unfair considering that one participant in this situation will never have the opportunity to speak for himself.

Such is life.

Wonderful! If you shoot, or otherwise seriously injure someone, just make sure they're dead and no worries. The police might be a little curious about the dead body, but just say "self-defense" and the investigation is concluded! No need to mess with things like judges and juries.

By the way, I think announcing that you're "not letting this one get away" qualifies as premeditation. As far as motive goes, again, another issue for a jury, which is all that many of us are asking for.

 

[Resume]

As far as motive goes, again, another issue for a jury, which is all that many of us are asking for.

Which is up to the prosecutor. No charges have been levied as of yet. Do you imagine a conspiracy?

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Which is up to the prosecutor. No charges have been levied as of yet. Do you imagine a conspiracy?

I don't imagine anything. For some reason, a man who has admittedly shot and killed a teenager is being taken at his word, yet the teen is presumed guilty of initiating assault worthy of taking a bullet.

I'm sorry, but this scares me. Don't go for a walk in any strange neighborhoods, folks. You might be the one that doesn't get away.

A conspiracy implies some kind of coverup. There's no coverup here, just people outright saying that the guy's word is good enough for them. He might still be prosecuted, though; the prosecutor doesn't have to decide immediately, and I'm not implying that he should.

 

[Resume]

I don't imagine anything. For some reason, a man who has admittedly shot and killed a teenager is being taken at his word, yet the teen is presumed guilty of initiating assault worthy of taking a bullet.

I'm sorry, but this scares me. Don't go for a walk in any strange neighborhoods, folks. You might be the one that doesn't get away.

A conspiracy implies some kind of coverup. There's no coverup here, just people outright saying that the guy's word is good enough for them. He might still be prosecuted, though; the prosecutor doesn't have to decide immediately, and I'm not implying that he should.

Can you imagine there are details the police have not released to the press? Or do you think that you are in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding this incident?

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Can you imagine there are details the police have not released to the press? Or do you think that you are in possession of all the relevant facts surrounding this incident?

No, I was responding to the facts I WAS made aware of, just like you.

I did point out that it wasn't over. I was just responding to those who blithely act as though thinking a trial might be in order was akin to forming a lynch mob.

A teen kid is dead under very questionable circumstances. I'm a little concerned, sorry.

 

[WildCat]

Wonderful! If you shoot, or otherwise seriously injure someone, just make sure they're dead and no worries. The police might be a little curious about the dead body, but just say "self-defense" and the investigation is concluded! No need to mess with things like judges and juries.

There's nothing "wonderful" about it. It is what it is.

And what is your evidence that the investigation was concluded by the claim of self defense?

And once again, judges and juries don't investigate, the weigh the evidence presented by others. And thus far, there is not enough evidence to bring charges.

By the way, I think announcing that you're "not letting this one get away" qualifies as premeditation.

By what legal theory?

As far as motive goes, again, another issue for a jury, which is all that many of us are asking for.

Again, you're skipping the step where evidence is gathered and charges filed. Juries don't do investigations. In fact, jurors are specifically instructed not to investigate and doing so may result in the juror being dismissed and possibly a mistrial.

 

[Resume]

No, I was responding to the facts I WAS made aware of, just like you.

I did point out that it wasn't over. I was just responding to those who blithely act as though thinking a trial might be in order was akin to forming a lynch mob.

A teen kid is dead under very questionable circumstances. I'm a little concerned, sorry.

According to the "facts" that are available to us both, and the reality that Zimmerman has not yet been charged, the skeptic in me concludes there must be "facts" of which neither of us are aware.

What those might be I have no idea.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

And what is your evidence that the investigation was concluded by the claim of self defense?

Hopefully it's not concluded so early.

And once again, judges and juries don't investigate, the weigh the evidence presented by others. And thus far, there is not enough evidence to bring charges.

Other than the dead body.

Again, you're skipping the step where evidence is gathered and charges filed.

No, I'm disagreeing with the conclusions of many here, who are apparently willing to accept what Zimmerman says at face value.

Juries don't do investigations. In fact, jurors are specifically instructed not to investigate and doing so may result in the juror being dismissed and possibly a mistrial.

Good thing I never proposed that strawman then isn't it? I simply said that if self-defense is being brought forth as a mitigating factor in a shooting, it might be fair to bring it up before a jury. I think that's a fair and reasonable thing to do for a dead kid who can't speak for himself.

G'night

 

[TheGoldcountry]

According to the "facts" that are available to us both, and the reality that Zimmerman has not yet been charged, the skeptic in me concludes there must be "facts" of which neither of us are aware.

What those might be I have no idea.

There are many conclusions we can jump to from what we've seen and heard.
Your particular conclusion might indeed be correct, but in the absence of further evidence I don't think it's any more likely than others, and hardly the "skeptical" conclusion (if there is one from our position).

One thing I will agree on, however. From this point forward the whole thing seems likely to turn into a complete circus, which won't help anyone. Personally, I'm concerned about the possibility of future killings being handwaved away by some people amid self-defense claims, justified or groundless. This case seems destined for media name-calling and race baiting.
The possibility that Zimmermann winds up charged only because of media sensationalism is as bad as not being charged at all.

 

[Resume]

There are many conclusions we can jump to from what we've seen and heard.

Not really. Only if you want to. I'll reserve my conclusion thanks.

 

[tyr_13]

Yes, fully aware but, is it possible that this was an unfortunate interaction between two people who one happened to be black and one happened to be white without race ever being a factor? In the dark, with a hood on, did Zimmerman even know Martin was black?

Zimmerman isn't white. His father in a letter to a newspaper said, "George is a Spanish speaking minority with many black family members and friends. He would be the last to discriminate for any reason whatsoever." LINK

Again, I say the assumption that he must have been white and this must be racial motivated has unfortunate implications.

How much would it suck to be a kinda white looking Hispanic? You'd take crap from racist black people who don't like Hispanics. You'd take crap from racist white people who don't like Hispanics. Then if something happens with a black person, you're white and in the minds of apparently many therefore probably racist against black people.

The police insist that the 911 recordings support Zimmerman's version, so let's see how that pans out as well.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

According to the "facts" that are available to us both, and the reality that Zimmerman has not yet been charged, the skeptic in me concludes there must be "facts" of which neither of us are aware.
What those might be I have no idea.

Not really. Only if you want to. I'll reserve my conclusion thanks.

I was simply responding to your post. I've said more than once that the investigation isn't over yet, OK?
By saying that there are many conclusions that we CAN jump to, I was implying that we probably shouldn't jump to any.
However, based on the evidence, the skeptic in me concludes that you're going to keep being snarky no matter how often I explain myself, so I won't bother anymore.

 

[Resume]

I was simply responding to your post. I've said more than once that the investigation isn't over yet, OK?

Then we agree. More to come.

 

[Mumbles]

Zimmerman isn't white. His father in a letter to a newspaper said, "George is a Spanish speaking minority with many black family members and friends. He would be the last to discriminate for any reason whatsoever." LINK

Again, I say the assumption that he must have been white and this must be racial motivated has unfortunate implications.

How much would it suck to be a kinda white looking Hispanic? You'd take crap from racist black people who don't like Hispanics. You'd take crap from racist white people who don't like Hispanics. Then if something happens with a black person, you're white and in the minds of apparently many therefore probably racist against black people.

The police insist that the 911 recordings support Zimmerman's version, so let's see how that pans out as well.

BS. The 911 tapes are out.

We know, from Zimmerman's own call to 911, that he identified Martin as a black kid in a hoodie. We know that Martin saw him, aced him up , and then ran away, and that Zimmerman pursued him. This makes Zimmerman the clear aggressor. All the talk about how Martin ran up and attacked Zimmerman are out the window. They're wrong. The end.


We know, from reports, that several witnesses, as well as Martin's family, have identified the voice pleading for help as that of Rayvon Martin. And we know that the shouts for help went on for quite some time before Martin was shot.

We know that at least one person has alleged that the local police tampered with testimony.

And, of course, we know that Zimmerman shot Marvin.

We don't know George Zimmerman's version of the events, but we know that his father wrote that George stated that he didn't follow Martin, and we know that this is false, according to the 911 tape.

The police, here, seem to be completely delusional.

 

[WildCat]

The 911 tapes have been released.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

The 911 tapes have now been released.

Thanks.

 

[tyr_13]

BS. The 911 tapes are out.

We know, from Zimmerman's own call to 911, that he identified Martin as a black kid in a hoodie. We know that Martin saw him, aced him up , and then ran away, and that Zimmerman pursued him. This makes Zimmerman the clear aggressor. All the talk about how Martin ran up and attacked Zimmerman are out the window. They're wrong. The end.


We know, from reports, that several witnesses, as well as Martin's family, have identified the voice pleading for help as that of Rayvon Martin. And we know that the shouts for help went on for quite some time before Martin was shot.

We know that at least one person has alleged that the local police tampered with testimony.

And, of course, we know that Zimmerman shot Marvin.

We don't know George Zimmerman's version of the events, but we know that his father wrote that George stated that he didn't follow Martin, and we know that this is false, according to the 911 tape.

The police, here, seem to be completely delusional.

You're referring to the wrong 911 tapes. The ones I'm talking about were just released.

As for the rest, it's been addressed in the thread already, perhaps you should read it.

 

[WildCat]

We know, from Zimmerman's own call to 911, that he identified Martin as a black kid in a hoodie.

Race isn't mentioned until the dispatcher asks Zimmerman what race the guy is.

We know that Martin saw him, aced him up , and then ran away, and that Zimmerman pursued him. This makes Zimmerman the clear aggressor. All the talk about how Martin ran up and attacked Zimmerman are out the window. They're wrong. The end.

How does following someone make him the aggressor?

We know, from reports, that several witnesses, as well as Martin's family, have identified the voice pleading for help as that of Rayvon Martin. And we know that the shouts for help went on for quite some time before Martin was shot.

I don't see how they can tell who was shouting. It's far from a clear recording, the shouting is way in the background.

We know that at least one person has alleged that the local police tampered with testimony.

And the police say that woman changed her story.

We don't know George Zimmerman's version of the events, but we know that his father wrote that George stated that he didn't follow Martin, and we know that this is false, according to the 911 tape.

His father is not a witness.

 

[WildCat]

And I'm not saying it's relevant to anything except there was argument here about it, but the Miami Herald reports Martin was in Sanford because he was suspended from school:

Martin, who was from Miami Gardens, was killed in Sanford, a town of 55,000 just north of Orlando. His father took Trayvon there after the junior was suspended for 10 days from Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High.

The family has refused to say why Trayvon was suspended, only offering that he had violated school policy. They said his act was not violent or criminal.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604_p2/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html