• 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.

His face is down, the whole time. There is one part where the officer is looking at the back of his head but when he walks toward the door, I can't even see so much as a scratch. He was supposedly treated at the scene so there might be a reason why there is no blood. I don't know, though.

At right about 1:04, he walks, placing his back to the camera, and then looks down. When he looks down, you can see an egg right where the back of his head curves into his neck and I can't tell if it's a trick of the light or an small gash right at the curvature from the top of his head to the back. It looks kind of big and my experience with head wounds is that even the tiniest of cuts bleed like the dickens. Naturally, he's wearing a red jacket so claiming lack of blood from the head wound is difficult, but I would expect to see some blood, somewhere. I still don't know.
 
Last edited:
Memories do not improve over time. They only degrade.
...and people's perception of chaotic events is extraordinarily flawed during the actual event. If you had asked the officers who shot Amadou Diallo what happened DURING the shooting, they would've said that Diallo has a gun and he'd just shot one of the other officers. If you asked them afterward when they had time to look around and take a deep breath, they would've said that the other office actually tripped and wasn't shot and that Diallo didn't have a gun after all.

In other words, her 911 call was DURING the incident, this is more flawed than testimony after.
 
That was after she says she had been trying to call them repeatedly to tell them the same thing. This is information she had wished to state for awhile, it just apparently took that long for the police to pick up on one of her calls. It MAY also be the case (not saying it is for a fact) that hearing backstory helped her connect what she saw and who did what. I don't know if she'll be allowed to testify, but if so she will be a problem.

They also claim that the investigation notes show that they repeatedly tried to contact her. Again, she didn't get involved till the news went global.
 
EGarrett please stop "skimming" things and pick and choose bits and pieces of information, sometimes wrongly, to fit into your preconceived theory. Read carefully and analyze critically. Otherwise, just please stop posting cause it's painful.

Exactly this.
EG. Keep going. Evidence be damned.
 
No, the media is right, because you can't have it both ways.

All you have to do is read the law. It's impossible to imagine that it doesn't apply, since it (more than any other law) defines the limits of any person's obligation to retreat and rights to act in self defense under threat.

An "attack" or "combat" in a neighborhood where one person lives and another person is visiting would certainly constitute such a situation.
There are multiple laws in Florida, the one on SYG and the ones on other forms of justifiable use of force, which have been posted repeatedly, and discussed, and explained.

No one was in a SYG situation, in the position that Zimmerman claims he was, 'standing' was impossible, and therefore moot, but his 'fear for my life claim' fits directly into a different section of the statutes... as cited.
Perhaps you should take your own advice and actually read them all.

Or swallow the media's wild jump to erroneous conclusions, I really don't care.
 
I 'll agree that he was.

But as he wasn't part of the neighborhood watch, should those rules apply to him ?

So... wait. Are you saying Zimmerman wasn't actually in the neighborhood watch?

He was acting in the capacity of any citizen, reporting something he found suspicious.

I would argue that most people wouldn't have armed themselves and pursued Martin.

Nothing that he did, leading up to the altercation in question, was illegal or outside of his rights. Of course, that all rests on the question of whether or not he was patrolling. I know I read it somewhere, that he was on his way to the store but I haven't seen any official documentation to support that.

I never claimed Zimmerman acted illegally, only that he acted recklessly and irresponsibly.

And to say that he wasn't technically in violation of the rules because he claims to not have been acting in the capacity of a neighborhood watch member at that moment is hair-splitting bordering on nonsense.

He knew those rules existed. Presumably, he knew why those rules existed. He decided that in that moment, they didn't apply to him. That's reckless and irresponsible.
 
His face is down, the whole time. There is one part where the officer is looking at the back of his head but when he walks toward the door, I can't even see so much as a scratch. He was supposedly treated at the scene so there might be a reason why there is no blood. I don't know, though.
He didn't go to the hospital, but I thought the EMTs at least cleaned him up. Has anyone seen their run sheet?
 
He didn't go to the hospital, but I thought the EMTs at least cleaned him up. Has anyone seen their run sheet?

Yeah, I can't imagine the EMTs not cleaning him up but I would expect to see some bandaging on his head from getting slammed into the sidewalk. Also, the guy doesn't look all that fat.
 
He can still get manslaughter if he put himself in that situation voluntarily and without good cause.

As an extreme example, if I break into your house and I'm stealing your stuff and you come out of the bedroom with a gun in your hand, I have reason to believe I'm in grave danger, but that doesn't give me the right to shoot you.

It's very problematic if you start giving folks the legal right to instigate confrontations and then kill their targets if they start getting the worst of it.
False analogy. There are criminal actions whereby one can forfeit their life on the spot... *merely* being in a fist fight isn't one of them.

If you are interested in discussing the law, I'd appreciate it if you would take the time to learn what it actually is, instead of using wild assumptions and butressing them with debate team argumentation.
 
So... wait. Are you saying Zimmerman wasn't actually in the neighborhood watch?



I would argue that most people wouldn't have armed themselves and pursued Martin.



I never claimed Zimmerman acted illegally, only that he acted recklessly and irresponsibly.

And to say that he wasn't technically in violation of the rules because he claims to not have been acting in the capacity of a neighborhood watch member at that moment is hair-splitting bordering on nonsense.

He knew those rules existed. Presumably, he knew why those rules existed. He decided that in that moment, they didn't apply to him. That's reckless and irresponsible.
Excuse me, but what exactly is your point in continuing to pretend that, as many times as it has been made clear that he was not acting in any NW capacity, and that it has nothing to do with his actions?
 
Yeah, I can't imagine the EMTs not cleaning him up but I would expect to see some bandaging on his head from getting slammed into the sidewalk. Also, the guy doesn't look all that fat.

He does look a bit more imposing than I expected.
 
So... wait. Are you saying Zimmerman wasn't actually in the neighborhood watch?



I would argue that most people wouldn't have armed themselves and pursued Martin.



I never claimed Zimmerman acted illegally, only that he acted recklessly and irresponsibly.

And to say that he wasn't technically in violation of the rules because he claims to not have been acting in the capacity of a neighborhood watch member at that moment is hair-splitting bordering on nonsense.

He knew those rules existed. Presumably, he knew why those rules existed. He decided that in that moment, they didn't apply to him. That's reckless and irresponsible.

It's just the way I surmise the situation and completely nonfactual but I don't think he cocked his weapon before jumping out of the car and gave chase. I think it's likely that he had his weapon on him, when he left the house, and still happened to have it on him when he got out of the car. According to his story, it was holstered when Trayvon went for it, which indicates that the gun wasn't an aspect of the chase. I just find the statement that he armed himself to pursue Martin is dishonest.
 
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