Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's not uncommon at all for people to follow suspicious persons after they call the police, so they can point them out to them when police arrive. It happens all the time when people report hit-and-run or drunk drivers, for example.

Following someone is not evidence of intent to detain, it's merely evidence of intent to keep them in sight.

It is evidence in this case. It's more likely Z would have followed at a greater distance if he had no intention of stopping Trayvon.

You continue to cherry pick while complaining about others doing the same. It's not objective, it's hypocritical.

Re the witnesses, Anderson Cooper interviewed them.

“So you saw Mr. Zimmerman on top of Trayvon Martin?” Cooper questioned.

“Trayvon, exactly,” Lamilla said.

“When you say on top of, how so?” the CNN anchor pressed.

“Straddling him,” Cutcher replied.

“His legs were straddling him?” Cooper followed up.

“One on each side, on his knees, with his hands on his back. I immediately thought, okay, obviously if it’s the shooter, he would have ran,” Cutcher detailed.

If you go to check on a downed person you do not straddle them.

It's also more credible than claiming who was hitting who since by that time it is unmistakeable which guy is which.

I want to know if Trayvon was shot n the back. The autopsy remains a key piece of missing information here.

 

[varwoche]

There you go again! What definition are you using varwoche?

All you're achieving here is placing a spotlight on the incorrect, pseudo-skeptical nature of your transparent semantic games.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I never made any such claim.

But many people describe him as a "little boy", including witness Cutcher, which is certainly not the case. By published accounts he was either 6'3" (news reports) or 6'0" (according to the partial police report) and anywhere from 140 - 160lbs. It's relevant because a lot of people find it inconceivable that a "little boy" like Martin would attack the 5'9" 240lb Zimmerman first, but he wasn't the "little boy" many of the published pictures depict and people assume him to have been.

Do you know how skinny a 6 ft tall person weighing 150 pounds is?


That's very thin.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Re the gun issues we've been discussing:

The death weapon was a Kel-Tec PF9 semiautomatic 9mm pistol. It has been reported that the gun was recovered with a full magazine and that only the chambered round had been fired. This is a condition we associate with something preventing the gun from cycling a fresh round from the magazine into the chamber after the shot was discharged. One thing that can cause that is another man’s hand wrapped around the pistol, retarding its slide mechanism. This would indicate, as could certain gunshot residue patterns or cuts in certain places if found on Trayvon Martin’s hand(s), that a struggle for a gun was taking place when the fatal shot was fired. This would clearly change the shape of the case. But – WE DON’T KNOW YET.

Is this credible? I'm just curious.


Also note the retractions at the end re Trayvon being suspended from school. People want to paint the kids as bad. There still is no evidence of that yet the discussion continues without said evidence.

 

[AlBell]

Do you think there will be enough evidence around for a conviction?

If all there is is unreliable eye-witness accounts and very little evidence gathered by the police, due to the initial assumption of self defence, then he walks?

Maybe?

If the evidence is not sufficient, no matter how much it seems (for whatever reason) that Zimmerman was not acting in self defence, if there is insufficient evidence, then he walks. Which is as it should be.

The Feds will imo find a persecutable Civil Rights Violation at minimum.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Re the gun issues we've been discussing:Is this credible? I'm just curious.


Also note the retractions at the end re Trayvon being suspended from school. People want to paint the kids as bad. There still is no evidence of that yet the discussion continues without said evidence.

This is a retraction ?
Also, HuffPost reports that Trayvon had been suspended for chronic truancy, but another source notes that his school’s posted rules do not prescribe that length of suspension for that minor an offense
It still sounds like he was suspended, although I agree it has nothing to do with the events.

The gun comment sounds plausible, it also would support the comment posted under this story.

When they release witness statements and forensic evidence , it will ikely n answer many of these questions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation...543_21338348_10150678478076543#fa3233e318a0eb

Posted by Blake: This is not the real story. George called 911 to report a suspicious person. As he got off the phone the kid attacked him and started beating the crap out of him and slamming his head against the walkway. All the while saying "you're gunna die tonight motherxxxxxx". George was screaming help when someone in a nearby apartment called 911 again. George's shirt came up while the kid was beating him, revealing the gun that he is licensed to carry. The kid went for the gun and they struggled for it, George ended up shooting the kid and saving his own life. All these people on yahoo saying that he should be in jail when they don't even know what happened. George is the brother-in-law of one of our good family friends, works with my parents, and is one of the nicest most gentle people you will ever meet. He's completely devastated that this happened and has barely been functional from the guilt. No one shoots someone for no reason, and especially not George. And they need to stop pulling the race card, George is Hispanic, not white.

 

[varwoche]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation...543_21338348_10150678478076543#fa3233e318a0eb

Posted by Blake: This is not the real story. George called 911 to report a suspicious person. As he got off the phone the kid attacked him and started beating the crap out of him and slamming his head against the walkway.

What point are you trying to make by posting this person's blatant misrepresentation of the facts?

 

[sgtbaker]

What point are you trying to make by posting this person's blatant misrepresentation of the facts?

There's no evidence that it's a blatent misrepresentation because we know there are conflicting stories from witnesses. Regardless, we have no idea who this Blake fella is. He could be some random internet person who has decided to jump in on the rumor mill. It's irrelavent.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It is evidence in this case. It's more likely Z would have followed at a greater distance if he had no intention of stopping Trayvon.

You continue to cherry pick while complaining about others doing the same. It's not objective, it's hypocritical.

Re the witnesses, Anderson Cooper interviewed them.If you go to check on a downed person you do not straddle them.

It's also more credible than claiming who was hitting who since by that time it is unmistakeable which guy is which.

I want to know if Trayvon was shot n the back. The autopsy remains a key piece of missing information here.

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/witness-sanford-police-blew-us-teen-slaying/nLSqk/

However, witness Mary Cutcher said she knew the truth.
Cutcher said police only took a two or three sentence statement from her, but it took about 30 minutes to tell WFTV the story.

As far as I can tell, she didn't see anything until *after* the shooting.

Cutcher said even if Martin got the best of Zimmerman, it's no excuse to kill an unarmed teenager who is half his size.

But yes, she knows the truth. Of all the witnesses, she certainly sounds like she may have an agenda.

Listen to her 911 call from that evening, and then compare what she said then to what she is saying now.

 

[Roadtoad]

I'm still trying to look for facts out of the posts. My own guess -- and it's only a guess -- is that no matter what happens, Zimmerman's life as he knew it is over. Even if he's tried and found innocent, he's going to be forever known as the guy who killed an innocent high school student. The facts will no longer have any bearing on any part of this.

This is generally Sharpton's MO, as we saw with the Tawana Brawley case. It doesn't matter what facts are presented, he's going to destroy anyone he thinks deserves it. He's a self-appointed judge, jury, and executioner in the court of public opinion.

In other developments: Geraldo Rivera weighs in! It's the HOODIE'S fault!

"I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin's death as George Zimmerman was," Rivera said on Fox and Friends. "You have to recognize that this whole stylizing yourself as a gangsta—you're going to be a gangsta wannabe, well people are going to perceive you as a menace. That's what happens. It is an instant, reflexive action."

After co-host Steve Doocy noted that New Yorkers on Wednesday had held a "Million Hoodie March" in support of Martin, 17, Rivera added: "You cannot rehabilitate the hoodie."

Rivera was never a journalist. This proves it.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

There's no evidence that it's a blatent misrepresentation because we know there are conflicting stories from witnesses. Regardless, we have no idea who this Blake fella is. He could be some random internet person who has decided to jump in on the rumor mill. It's irrelavent.

He totally could be anyone from the internet.

It was simply relevant to the possibility of the gun having been jammed due to a struggle, leaving a full magazine. This is a story from someone claiming to know zimmerman that agrees with that scenario. Just something to consider.

I would again like to point out , for a 'skeptic forum' some posters would appear to have drawn conclusions from facts not yet in evidence, without accounting for facts already in evidence.

 

[crimresearch]

Stand your ground, whatever that lawyer says, was/is meant to apply outside the home/your property. The law already allowed for that for all practical purposes (wherein practical means you are not required to try to run away so the attacker has a clear shot at your back) the new law just expanded where it applied to places external to your house and property.

Regardless of that, the fun part is that thanks to Rev. Al (and others) who cannot learn to keep his mouth shut and stay out of legal things like this it is now impossible for Zimmerman to get a trial that can get jurors who have not firmly made up their minds already on guilt or innocence. Zimmerman will pretty certainly be arrested and probably be tried but any lawyer worth half a cent (most of them) will almost certainly get him off on appeal.

The lawyer said 'primarily', not 'only'.
The statute says 'anywhere you have a right to be'.
The legislature says that the legislative intent was not for chasing down people.

Given Zimmerman's actions and status, even his own lawyer understands that sustaining the self defense charge isn't going to depend on some of the stuff floating around the media and the internet.

The focus is going to be: *At the time of the shooting* were Zimmerman's beliefs and actions reasonably (legal 'reasonable', not internet 'reasonable') within the realm of using deadly force in self defense? (Not whether Zimmerman was standing his ground)

 

[sgtbaker]

He totally could be anyone from the internet.

It was simply relevant to the possibility of the gun having been jammed due to a struggle, leaving a full magazine. This is a story from someone claiming to know zimmerman that agrees with that scenario. Just something to consider.

I would again like to point out , for a 'skeptic forum' some posters would appear to have drawn conclusions from facts not yet in evidence, without accounting for facts already in evidence.

I agree, and heard someone on a talk radio show make a very good point; a lot of what we have, here are people drawing facts from their conclusions. I don't want to quote it because those weren't his exact words, they are just the best I can remember.

I haven't disagreed with a whole lot of what you posted. I am just leary of things like that. There is nothing stopping you or I from jumping into that discussion and saying, "My cousin sits next to Trayvon in class and says that he picks fist fights with students all the time. What the media doesn't want you to know is that Trayvon is suspended for bullying."

At this point, it is growing difficult to take anything seriously, anymore because the media doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot of fact checking before throwing up a new headline.

 

[WildCat]

It is evidence in this case. It's more likely Z would have followed at a greater distance if he had no intention of stopping Trayvon.

You continue to cherry pick while complaining about others doing the same. It's not objective, it's hypocritical.

Neither you nor I know how far away he was, nor how the gap was closed. And it certainly says nothing about an attempt to detain him, you're making an assumption that is not in evidence.

Re the witnesses, Anderson Cooper interviewed them.If you go to check on a downed person you do not straddle them.

It's also more credible than claiming who was hitting who since by that time it is unmistakeable which guy is which.

I want to know if Trayvon was shot n the back. The autopsy remains a key piece of missing information here.

None of that tells us anything about who was in what position when the shot was fired, that witness didn't see that part. Bu since the body was found face down, for it to have happened at that point he would have been shot in the back, and we don't know if that was the case. But if it is I agree Zimmerman should be found guilty.

 

[ravdin]

It's not uncommon at all for people to follow suspicious persons after they call the police, so they can point them out to them when police arrive. It happens all the time when people report hit-and-run or drunk drivers, for example.

Following someone is not evidence of intent to detain, it's merely evidence of intent to keep them in sight.

I did just that with a hit and run drunk driver not too long ago. I followed him so that I could accurately report his location, license plate, and a description of his car to the police.

A couple of differences in my case were that 1) I actually witnessed this driver hit another car and then try to speed away, 2) the 911 operator did not discourage me from pursuit, and 3) I had no intention of preventing him from fleeing, even if I could have.

 

[sgtbaker]

Neither you nor I know how far away he was, nor how the gap was closed. And it certainly says nothing about an attempt to detain him, you're making an assumption that is not in evidence.


None of that tells us anything about who was in what position when the shot was fired, that witness didn't see that part. Bu since the body was found face down, for it to have happened at that point he would have been shot in the back, and we don't know if that was the case. But if it is I agree Zimmerman should be found guilty.

This woman Cutcher just seems like someone who, when it was nothing, didn't want to get involved. Now that it's national news, she wants her 15 minutes. She's decided that since she didn't hear "punching," it didn't happen, so the whole story must be a lie. She's also decided that since she didn't hear punching and the crying for help, stemming from the lack of punching, stopped as soon as the struggle ended that it must have been Trayvon. She's also decided that since she didn't hear fighting, the crying stopped when the struggle ended, and it must have been Trayvon screaming for help, that even if Trayvon did attack him, which according to her couldn't have happened because she didn't hear "punching," that Zimmerman must have chased him down and started the whole thing. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why any media is still giving her any attention.

 

[Roadtoad]

I agree, and heard someone on a talk radio show make a very good point; a lot of what we have, here are people drawing facts from their conclusions. I don't want to quote it because those weren't his exact words, they are just the best I can remember.

I haven't disagreed with a whole lot of what you posted. I am just leary of things like that. There is nothing stopping you or I from jumping into that discussion and saying, "My cousin sits next to Trayvon in class and says that he picks fist fights with students all the time. What the media doesn't want you to know is that Trayvon is suspended for bullying."

At this point, it is growing difficult to take anything seriously, anymore because the media doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot of fact checking before throwing up a new headline.

How is this unique? Newspapers have been doing this since the Revolutionary War and before. "Facts" are what they want you to think they are.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I agree, and heard someone on a talk radio show make a very good point; a lot of what we have, here are people drawing facts from their conclusions. I don't want to quote it because those weren't his exact words, they are just the best I can remember.

I haven't disagreed with a whole lot of what you posted. I am just leary of things like that. There is nothing stopping you or I from jumping into that discussion and saying, "My cousin sits next to Trayvon in class and says that he picks fist fights with students all the time. What the media doesn't want you to know is that Trayvon is suspended for bullying."

At this point, it is growing difficult to take anything seriously, anymore because the media doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot of fact checking before throwing up a new headline.

I agree, that story doesn't add any new facts or evidence, and it probably didn't add much by posting it. I had it open in another tab and it seemed relevant.

INstead, I should have asked for any other links which claim the magazine was still full - ie the gun did not chamber a round from the magazine.

 

[Roadtoad]

I did just that with a hit and run drunk driver not too long ago. I followed him so that I could accurately report his location, license plate, and a description of his car to the police.

A couple of differences in my case were that 1) I actually witnessed this driver hit another car and then try to speed away, 2) the 911 operator did not discourage me from pursuit, and 3) I had no intention of preventing him from fleeing, even if I could have.

Did you get the info to the police? And did they bust him?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Neither you nor I know how far away he was, nor how the gap was closed. And it certainly says nothing about an attempt to detain him, you're making an assumption that is not in evidence....

The timing of when the phone call was cut off and the police arrived as well as the timing of the shot on the 911 tape suggests Z was very close when Trayvon asked him why Z was following him.

This is interesting, City Manager Norton Bonaparte issues an FAQ on the case:

Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer, when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.

Oh the tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.