• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't mean to imply anything regarding who could have overpowered whom or anything of that sort. I am merely taking issue with the idea of painting Martin as being an apparent, immense, and immediate physical threat in terms of size compared to Zimmerman.
Well there's the bit about breaking his nose and hitting his head on the ground ard enough to make a gash.
 

The source is Zimmerman, "George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch crime captain who shot dead 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, originally told police in a written statement that Martin knocked him down with a punch to the nose, repeatedly slammed his head on the ground and tried to take his gun, a police source told ABC News."
 
The source is Zimmerman, "George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch crime captain who shot dead 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, originally told police in a written statement that Martin knocked him down with a punch to the nose, repeatedly slammed his head on the ground and tried to take his gun, a police source told ABC News."
Yes, but prior to that the only source we had for that was from a comment someone posted on a news story.
 
The source is Zimmerman, "George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch crime captain who shot dead 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, originally told police in a written statement that Martin knocked him down with a punch to the nose, repeatedly slammed his head on the ground and tried to take his gun, a police source told ABC News."

I didn't know people couldn't figure that out on their own...
 
I've twice cited that his lawyer would likely invoke the SYG law, and that the prosecutor says the SYG law will make the case against Zimmerman more difficult to make.



Is ABC news lying?
And I've cited news articles 3 times that quote him directly as saying tht SYG isn't an issue. You refusing to look at it doesn't change that.

Where are the quotation marks in your article? What's more likely... that the reporter without the quotes was adding in supposition, or that the other articles deliberately created a false quote?.
 
This should be repeated. There's no evidence presented so far that Zimmerman was actually out looking for trouble.

But this does NOT mean his actions weren't reckless or foolish. They were. It comes back to the statement from the dispatch office, "We don't need you to do that."

In similar situations that I've been in, I'd simply pick up and go about my business, or create business to be on that took me from where I was. End of story. These people are the trained professionals: Leave it to them.

The thing is, before this story blew up and the media ran with it, way back when Zimmerman first made his statement to the police, it lined up with what seemed to happen. According to Zimmerman's story he stopped the pursuit and was heading back to the car when Martin came back to him. According to the recorded call, the dispatcher said, "we don't need to do that," and Zimmerman said, "Okay." He didn't argue, he didn't say anything to the contrary, he just said, "Okay." That, at the very least, opens up the possibility that Zimmerman did comply with the dispatcher and Martin did, in fact, come back to confront Zimmerman as to why he was following him. Remember, in the call, you can hear the wind for a decent amount of time, indicating that Zimmerman was out of the car and walking for a good distance, yet the police tape seems to be really close to the road which also supports the possibility that Zimmerman was confronted on his way back to the truck, where the fight ensued. Then the only actual eye witness to the fight sees Martin on top of Zimmerman and Zimmerman is the one screaming for help.

All the motivated witnesses that come out days and weeks later to offer up opinions, with zero evidence, as to what they think actually happened aside; let's look at Zimmerman's story. Having the gun on him, regardless of how other countries view guns, is not illegal in this country. He has a CCP. I don't know how gun owners are, about their guns; if they regularly keep them on their person or not. Regardless, Zimmerman, legally having his gun on his person, reports a susicious looking individual. The person has something in his hands and begins to approach the car, then takes off running. Zimmerman gets out and follows, then it is suggested to him not to pursuit. Zimmerman ends the pursuit but Martin comes back and confronts him, at some point punching him in the nose, taking him to the ground and repeatedly bashing his head on the ground. Then his attacker goes for his gun, he now thinks his attacker is going to kill him so he fights for the gun and kills his attacker. If (hypothetically) that were the case, is he still reckless?
 
Zimmerman's lawyer is. He claimed that Trayvon went after his (Zimmerman's) gun during the scuffle (or what I would call a fist fight). So it's that much more difficult for the prosecutor to knock down the self-defense claim given the SYG law.
OK, you are beyond credibility here... nowhere has Zimmerman's lawyer said a word about his client being raped, robbed, or assaulted with a deadly weapon. No claim that he was intervening to stop a forcible felony. No stand your ground. Simply self defense.

The exact claim is that Trayvon went for the gun, putting Zimmerman in fear for his life.
http://gma.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-shooter-told-cops-teenager-went-gun-030349812--abc-news.html

George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch crime captain who shot dead 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, originally told police in a written statement that Martin knocked him down with a punch to the nose, repeatedly slammed his head on the ground and tried to take his gun, a police source told ABC News.
Zimmerman had claimed he had called police about Martin, whom he found suspicious, then went back to his car when Martin attacked him, punching him.

The new information is the most complete version yet of what Zimmerman claims happened on the night of Feb. 26 when he shot and killed the teenager.

In addition, an eyewitness, 13-year-old Austin Brown, told police he saw a man fitting Zimmerman's description lying on the grass moaning and crying for help just seconds before he heard the gunshot that killed Martin.

The initial police report noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of the head and nose, and after medical attention it was decided that he was in good enough condition to travel in a police cruiser to the Sanford, Fla., police station for questioning. He was not arrested.

As I've been explaining for 50 some pages now, fists alone aren't enough.

But go ahead, pretend this article doesn't exist either...
 
Last edited:
The thing is, before this story blew up and the media ran with it, way back when Zimmerman first made his statement to the police, it lined up with what seemed to happen. According to Zimmerman's story he stopped the pursuit and was heading back to the car when Martin came back to him. According to the recorded call, the dispatcher said, "we don't need to do that," and Zimmerman said, "Okay." He didn't argue, he didn't say anything to the contrary, he just said, "Okay." That, at the very least, opens up the possibility that Zimmerman did comply with the dispatcher and Martin did, in fact, come back to confront Zimmerman as to why he was following him. Remember, in the call, you can hear the wind for a decent amount of time, indicating that Zimmerman was out of the car and walking for a good distance, yet the police tape seems to be really close to the road which also supports the possibility that Zimmerman was confronted on his way back to the truck, where the fight ensued. Then the only actual eye witness to the fight sees Martin on top of Zimmerman and Zimmerman is the one screaming for help.

All the motivated witnesses that come out days and weeks later to offer up opinions, with zero evidence, as to what they think actually happened aside; let's look at Zimmerman's story. Having the gun on him, regardless of how other countries view guns, is not illegal in this country. He has a CCP. I don't know how gun owners are, about their guns; if they regularly keep them on their person or not. Regardless, Zimmerman, legally having his gun on his person, reports a susicious looking individual. The person has something in his hands and begins to approach the car, then takes off running. Zimmerman gets out and follows, then it is suggested to him not to pursuit. Zimmerman ends the pursuit but Martin comes back and confronts him, at some point punching him in the nose, taking him to the ground and repeatedly bashing his head on the ground. Then his attacker goes for his gun, he now thinks his attacker is going to kill him so he fights for the gun and kills his attacker. If (hypothetically) that were the case, is he still reckless?

If the truth be told, at this point I don't know. Matters have become so muddied by the actions of so many, it's hard to tell. At this point, I don't trust anyone, and I'm waiting to hear what the FBI and the State have to say about all of this.
 
The thing is, before this story blew up and the media ran with it, way back when Zimmerman first made his statement to the police, it lined up with what seemed to happen. According to Zimmerman's story he stopped the pursuit and was heading back to the car when Martin came back to him. According to the recorded call, the dispatcher said, "we don't need to do that," and Zimmerman said, "Okay." He didn't argue, he didn't say anything to the contrary, he just said, "Okay." That, at the very least, opens up the possibility that Zimmerman did comply with the dispatcher and Martin did, in fact, come back to confront Zimmerman as to why he was following him. Remember, in the call, you can hear the wind for a decent amount of time, indicating that Zimmerman was out of the car and walking for a good distance, yet the police tape seems to be really close to the road which also supports the possibility that Zimmerman was confronted on his way back to the truck, where the fight ensued. Then the only actual eye witness to the fight sees Martin on top of Zimmerman and Zimmerman is the one screaming for help.

All the motivated witnesses that come out days and weeks later to offer up opinions, with zero evidence, as to what they think actually happened aside; let's look at Zimmerman's story. Having the gun on him, regardless of how other countries view guns, is not illegal in this country. He has a CCP. I don't know how gun owners are, about their guns; if they regularly keep them on their person or not. Regardless, Zimmerman, legally having his gun on his person, reports a susicious looking individual. The person has something in his hands and begins to approach the car, then takes off running. Zimmerman gets out and follows, then it is suggested to him not to pursuit. Zimmerman ends the pursuit but Martin comes back and confronts him, at some point punching him in the nose, taking him to the ground and repeatedly bashing his head on the ground. Then his attacker goes for his gun, he now thinks his attacker is going to kill him so he fights for the gun and kills his attacker. If (hypothetically) that were the case, is he still reckless?

Probably not.
One thing that I keep pondering is that Trayvon's behaviour in this and similar scenarios turns around 180 degrees. From running away to confronting and attacking Zimmerman. It's possible, but it seems so contrary.
 
Probably not.
One thing that I keep pondering is that Trayvon's behaviour in this and similar scenarios turns around 180 degrees. From running away to confronting and attacking Zimmerman. It's possible, but it seems so contrary.

When did he run away? What time frame are you talking about?

His girlfriend says that he said he was not going to run away at one point.
 
Probably not.
One thing that I keep pondering is that Trayvon's behaviour in this and similar scenarios turns around 180 degrees. From running away to confronting and attacking Zimmerman. It's possible, but it seems so contrary.

The only speculations I can come up with would involve presuming to know what was going on in Trayvon's head. In the phone call, Zimmerman says that Trayvon was just standing there, checking him out. Supposedly, on the phone call with his girlfriend, Trayvon tells her that this guy is watching him. There is no way to know but it's possible that those two moments are coinciding. She told him to run because she was scared for him, some creepy guy in a car is staring at him. Perhaps he listened to her and ran, but then felt cowardice for running. I've seen people do that, a lot, in my life; try to get out of a confrontation and then regret not standing their ground. Maybe he just throught, "F-that! I am not going to let that guy intimidate me."

Seriously, this is me using my imagination in the absense of information.
 
Probably not.
One thing that I keep pondering is that Trayvon's behaviour in this and similar scenarios turns around 180 degrees. From running away to confronting and attacking Zimmerman. It's possible, but it seems so contrary.

Well another possibility is that while going back to his truck, Martin was doubling back to get to the house he was staying at. They can't see each other until the last second. When they do see each other they are closer now & Zimmerman thinks Martin doubled back to confront him. Martin asks why Zimmerman was following him & Zimmerman reaches for his phone to call police. Martin reacts to Zimmerman reaching & decks him. Martin sees the gun & now believes he's fighting for his life so he piles on & tries to get the gun. Zimmerman now fears for his life & manages to draw & fire.
 
Probably not.
One thing that I keep pondering is that Trayvon's behaviour in this and similar scenarios turns around 180 degrees. From running away to confronting and attacking Zimmerman. It's possible, but it seems so contrary.

Teenagers can act stupid and fail to exhibit good judgement and self control. Sometimes all at once. (disclaimer: I have 2)

I don't find it implausible that TM got tired of being followed and decided to turn and confront GZ. I am not claiming that is what happened, just that something along those lines is not implausible.

ETA: or, that as he got closer to 'home' he felt more confident in his position
 
Last edited:
That's what it sounded to me. Either way, it demonstrates the grossly prejudiced opinion Zimmerman seems to have formed about Martin for the flimsiest of reasons.

I hear "phones". I also hear the wind hit the mic on the phone just as he says the second word so it's distorted but it sounds like he almost dropped the phone and then cursed it for not being designed to rest on the shoulder. My bias, though, is because it happens to me all the time and "*********** phones" is exactly what I say. It might be some pareidolia-like thing, though.

When they did it on CNN; cleaned it up, slowed it down, and just played the second word over and over, the reporter seemed even that much more convinced that he said coons but it convinced me, that much more that he said phones. It's weird how so many people can hear so many different things from one word.
 
I'll need to find the details of the FL law but most states which allow concealed carried weapons have laws on the books that prohibit flashing guns. The gun must be carried in a holster or pack that conceals the fact that one is carrying a weapon. Many of them do not look like a traditional cowboy holster, they look like pouches or fanny packs.

If Martin went for Zimmerman's gun, he would have had to recognize a holster and remove the gun from the holster while in the middle of a scuffle.

Unless Zimmerman was carrying a concealed weapon in his car, then the laws are different. A concealed weapon in a vehicle needs to be securely encased. If Zimmerman pulled it out of that case in order to stalk Martin, he may not have had a body holster. In that case he may have had the weapon in his hand (or waistband) but probably was not carrying it in a legal fashion. Even the most lenient gun states don't allow you to run around waving a gun.

Either Martin had very limited access to a holstered gun or he could have seen Zimmerman holding a gun. In the latter case, he probably would have tried to avoid confrontation.
 
Well another possibility is that while going back to his truck, Martin was doubling back to get to the house he was staying at. They can't see each other until the last second. When they do see each other they are closer now & Zimmerman thinks Martin doubled back to confront him. Martin asks why Zimmerman was following him & Zimmerman reaches for his phone to call police. Martin reacts to Zimmerman reaching & decks him. Martin sees the gun & now believes he's fighting for his life so he piles on & tries to get the gun. Zimmerman now fears for his life & manages to draw & fire.
While just a theory, it is indeed one that fits all the available information without piling on extraneous assumptions.
 
This should be repeated. There's no evidence presented so far that Zimmerman was actually out looking for trouble.
That depends on how you define trouble. Looking for suspicious people is not the same as keeping an eye on the neighborhood. My neighborhood has an informal watch program. If someone was in my neighbor's yard, I pay attention and so do my neighbors. But we don't worry about people walking down the street.

This was about 7pm. That's not even a high crime time frame. Home burglars more often strike when people are at work during the day, or steal from garages and cars in the middle of the night. How many burglars are out casing a housing complex at 7pm?

But if you were someone looking for trouble, expecting trouble, and expecting a black kid in a hoodie to be a criminal, you might then act like Z did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom