Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[crimresearch]

They claim it now but that is not what their, specifically Martin's father's, statement to police said.

Factual speculation? Bwahahaha.

By the way did you ever back up your claim that there was no evidence of a chase?

Or was that factual speculation OK?

 

[Mumbles]

Zimmerman's fathers statements about what happened that night are worthless because he wasn't there. His statements about the race of his son and the race of his own relations should probably be given the benefit of the doubt and a hell of a lot more weight than what you think Zimmerman looks like.

Oh. Okay.

They discussed the topic with Zimmerman when the watch captain knocked on their door late last year. Zimmerman seemed friendly, helpful, and a “pretty cool dude,” Ibrahim Rashada said.

“He came by here and talked about carrying guns and getting my wife more involved with guns,” he said. “He said I should have a weapon and that his wife took classes to learn how to use one.

“I do have a weapon, but I don’t walk around the neighborhood with mine!”

Actually, he does not walk around the neighborhood at all.

“I fit the stereotype he emailed around,” he said. “Listen, you even hear me say it: ‘A black guy did this. A black guy did that.’ So I thought, ‘Let me sit in the house. I don’t want anyone chasing me.’ ”

Sure. No stereotyping. Just like Leonard Pitts is just a crazy black guy playing the race card. We all know how the blacks are.

 

[tyr_13]

I see no reason to believe the police here, given that they've demonstrably given a false statement to the press.

Being mistake in speaking to the press doesn't mean they are in a conspiracy to the point where they would alter recorded statements. Now, they might be in a cover up for some unknown reason, I don't see why they would be protecting Zimmerman, but that isn't sufficient to prove it.

If you're going to ignore everything the police say, or accounts that support Zimmerman's version of events, why even bother discussing it at all?

I was going to try to explain why using testimony of events that come out after everyone has had time to swap notes and come up with what they believe happened is a poor idea and something every investigator should be keenly aware of, but as usual someone else in the skeptical community explains it much better than I can.

The Skeptiod podcasts on the Fatima Miracle of the Sun, and the Westall '66 UFO explain very nicely why this is the case. Even if you discount everything else I'm saying and still disagree on the nature of the 'evidence' you are relying on, these are still useful concepts to know and hopefully apply.

 

[tyr_13]

By the way did you ever back up your claim that there was no evidence of a chase?

Or was that factual speculation OK?

There wasn't evidence of a chase made public when I made that statement, so I have nothing to defend.

And I'm not the one calling speculation factual.

Oh. Okay.



Sure. No stereotyping. Just like Leonard Pitts is just a crazy black guy playing the race card. We all know how the blacks are.

I could be wrong. Maybe he was racist. Note that the evidence of this is not the evidence I criticized and you used before. Even if it turns out that Zimmerman is racially biased, the evidence you presented before for it was still invalid, and fallacious reasoning.

If the highlighted portion is intended to imply that I'm saying what I'm saying because I'm racially biased against black people you are engaged in ad hom and poisoning the well. You're wrong and it's a discredit to skeptics.

 

[Checkmite]

So now Martin's suspicions about Zimmerman are sufficient reason to initiate a confrontation with Zimmerman, but Zimmerman's suspicions about Martin are insufficient to follow Martin?

Running away from someone is a strange way to "initiate a confrontation".

 

[crimresearch]

There wasn't evidence of a chase made public when I made that statement, so I have nothing to defend.
And I'm not the one calling speculation factual.

So the 911 tape, (post #276) clearly showing Zimmerman as saying about Martin 'he ran', coupled with the fact that Zimmerman got from his vehicle to the scene before a high school athlete could make it inside to safety, is in no way evidence of a chase to you?

 

[tyr_13]

So the 911 tape, clearly showing Zimmerman as saying about Martin 'he ran', coupled with the fact that Zimmerman got from his vehicle to the scene before a high school athlete could make it inside to safety, is in no way evidence of a chase to you?

I don't believe that tape was out when I made the statement, I clearly said that Zimmerman did follow Martin, and I suggest that you are becoming nit-pickingly adversarial needlessly.

 

[triforcharity]

And if Martin hadn't gone OUTSIDE to get skittles this wouldn't have occurred.

Wow. Just wow. Grasping at straws much?

And Zimmerman had every right to leave his vehicle, and to follow anyone he wished. Just like Martin had the right to go outside to get skittles.

The dispatcher told him "We don't need you to do that."

The Neighborhood Watch rules state you OBSERVE and REPORT.

What part of that entails chasing a boy who did nothing wrong?

 

[triforcharity]

Can you tell the actor by the scream in the video I posted?

Have I lived with that actor for the last ~17 years, hearing him scream more than once a week, every week?

No?

Didn't think so.

 

[Cainkane1]

People are comming forward. They are saying the young man was screaming for help and was unarmed. Unless other factors come to light he was shot down in cold blood.

 

[crimresearch]

I don't believe that tape was out when I made the statement, I clearly said that Zimmerman did follow Martin, and I suggest that you are becoming nit-pickingly adversarial needlessly.

You came along well after the 911 tapes were linked and discussed here, and made a parenthetical point of claiming there was no evidence of running.

The evidence looks like just the opposite. Martin ran, Zimmerman caught up with him. That plays into what each one may have done next.

 

[Checkmite]

Being mistake in speaking to the press doesn't mean they are in a conspiracy to the point where they would alter recorded statements. Now, they might be in a cover up for some unknown reason, I don't see why they would be protecting Zimmerman, but that isn't sufficient to prove it.

I suggested earlier that it's maybe not so much that they're protecting Zimmerman as protecting themselves. Questions have been raised about their conduct during the investigation. Witnesses have described unusual questioning practice. They neglected to do any kind of background check on Zimmerman, accepting his statement at the scene that he had no record (they even told Martin's father that Zimmerman was "squeaky clean"). ABC News says the police also didn't test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol, which is supposed to be SOP for homicide cases. The police said Zimmerman indicated in the 911 tapes that he wasn't sure of the victim's race, when in the tape he actually identifies the kid as black right away. The Sanford PD dropped the ball all kinds of ways. But their shoddy investigation led them to announce that it was indeed a case of self-defense, and now they have to defend that finding in order to protect their credibility.

 

[332nd]

Define "aggressive attitude". And what does this have to do with what Martin knew?

It means he was showing signs of aggression. And I'm not talking about what Martin knew.

So? He still had every legal right to get out of his car and follow Martin.

And doing so was stupid.

Relevance?

Its something we know.

You can make any judgement you wish about anything you wish. But police and district attorneys don't have that luxury. They need facts and evidence.

I'll keep that in mind when jref becomes a court.

I see no reason whatsoever why someone shouldn't have the right to follow a suspiciopus person in their neighborhood.

I don't recall saying he didn't have that right. Could you point out where I did?

And once again: So now Martin's suspicions about Zimmerman are sufficient reason to initiate a confrontation with Zimmerman, but Zimmerman's suspicions about Martin are insufficient to follow Martin?

Why do you avoid the other possibility I mentioned?

 

[crimresearch]

I suggested earlier that it's maybe not so much that they're protecting Zimmerman as protecting themselves. Questions have been raised about their conduct during the investigation. Witnesses have described unusual questioning practice. They neglected to do any kind of background check on Zimmerman, accepting his statement at the scene that he had no record (they even told Martin's father that Zimmerman was "squeaky clean"). ABC News says the police also didn't test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol, which is supposed to be SOP for homicide cases. The police said Zimmerman indicated in the 911 tapes that he wasn't sure of the victim's race, when in the tape he actually identifies the kid as black right away. The Sanford PD dropped the ball all kinds of ways. But their shoddy investigation led them to announce that it was indeed a case of self-defense, and now they have to defend that finding in order to protect their credibility.

Well, again we have little to go on beyond the media's reports and some tapes where apparently different people are hearing entirely different things.

If there really wasn't enough PC to suspect Zimmerman of a crime, or hold him any longer, then it would be hard to support a non-consensual search for blood alcohol or drug content. People who are intoxicated are allowed to defend themselves too.

So is SPD telling the truth when they say there was not enough PC?
Do they have some compelling information which would overcome the outward appearances, but they aren't revealing what it is?
Holding it back would seem to be a poor way to calm community concerns.

I doubt that we will know until FDLE and the state prosecutors weigh in, unless the parents obtain a release of more SPD information.

 

[tyr_13]

You came along well after the 911 tapes were linked and discussed here, and made a parenthetical point of claiming there was no evidence of running.

I may have missed the link. Could you cite which post of mine you are talking about?

The evidence looks like just the opposite. Martin ran, Zimmerman caught up with him. That plays into what each one may have done next.

Zimmerman caught up, which is not evidence that he ran. Now, we know now that he most likely did run. However, that means Martin likely stopped at some point and turned to face Zimmerman. I don't believe that Zimmerman could have caught up with the athlete who had a head start without that, although it is possible.

 

[tyr_13]

Well, again we have little to go on beyond the media's reports and some tapes where apparently different people are hearing entirely different things.

If there really wasn't enough PC to suspect Zimmerman of a crime, or hold him any longer, then it would be hard to support a non-consensual search for blood alcohol or drug content. People who are intoxicated are allowed to defend themselves too.

So is SPD telling the truth when they say there was not enough PC?
Do they have some compelling information which would overcome the outward appearances, but they aren't revealing what it is?
Holding it back would seem to be a poor way to calm community concerns.

I doubt that we will know until FDLE and the state prosecutors weigh in, unless the parents obtain a release of more SPD information.

Many of the actions of people involved, police, witnesses, actors, in this case are puzzling. I really hope that the external agency investigations shed some light.

 

[WildCat]

I see no reason to believe the police here, given that they've demonstrably given a false statement to the press.

What false statement was that?

 

[tyr_13]

What false statement was that?

I believe he or she is referring to the statement that Zimmerman's record was clean.

 

[triforcharity]

Yet another "fact" not in evidence.

No, absolutely without a doubt a fact IN evidence.

He got OUT of his car, and ended up behind the houses.

If he wasn't CHASING Martin, why was he, on the recording, out of breath?

He was, without a doubt, CHASING him. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have been out of breath, and he wouldn't have been out of his vehicle.

 

[triforcharity]

Zimmerman did not own the entire complex, nor is there a shred of evidence that Zimmerman was in any kind of position of authority over the entire subdivision, so your astounding leap that the crime scene was Zimmerman's property is sheer garbage.

Actually, WildCat is correct on this. Zimmerman did in fact have a legal right to be in the common areas.

I lived in a HOA similar to this years ago while in college, and the only parts that were not considered common areas were your front and back porch, and the small patch of grass/foliage around your building.

Did you notice the 911 call 'behind my porch? The police report of grass stains? What kind of common area sidewalk is that?

Sometimes even the grass around the sidewalk is considered common areas.

It's only when you get within X feet (Usually, in my experience, about 5 feet or so) is it considered one of the homeowners.