• 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.
Blaming the follower for the followees bad reaction and decisions is pretty much blaming the victim.

This assumes Martin had a "bad reaction". We don't know that he did.

And for the record, the only victim here is Trayvon Martin. That you cite the "Don't blame the victim" argument while in the process of vilifying Martin is supremely ironic.

Consider this. Had TM actually gotten hold of GZ's gun and shot him (which according to the states was actually 4.4 times more likely than what did happen) would you consider that because GZ was following TM he got what he deserved?

I'm not sure why the hypotheticals have to always be about the awful things Martin might have done.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Zimmerman didn't have the right to defend himself if his story is true. The argument is that - at least for me - I don't believe Zimmerman's story is true.
 
No, it doesn't. Not under American law. That's why we have trials. You can keep saying that but it doesn't make it true.

When the case is about self defence it will certainly hang on who started the the altercation. If it was GZ, then his defence is gone. If it was TM to he has to face the second hurdle of whether he had a genuine belief his life was in danger. It's not going to matter whether or not TM actually commited a crime before GZ started to follow him, that's totally irrelevant to what happened after that.
 
  • GZ had a gun.
  • GZ followed TM
  • GZ shot TM
  • TM is dead.
  • If GZ had not followed TM then he (TM) would very likely be alive today.
Now, you can try as hard as you like to dance around the facts but they are the facts.

Your point is fine as far as it goes.

What if Zimmerman testifies that Martin is the one who pulled the gun? Zimmerman's gun, I mean.

I think that is going to be part of the story we get from Zimmerman.
 
But he's the neighborhood watch captain, and you aren't.

He would naturally follow Martin if the dispatcher said that to him, I'd think.

He'd see it as his job.
Where in the Neighborhood Watch rules does it say to follow suspicious people?

The gun is another matter. If he normally wore it concealed, then he probably normally walks around with it and didn't even think about it when he got out of the car.
Having a gun means added responsibility.

  • Following a suspicious person increases the likelihood of a confrontation.
  • Having a gun increases the likelihood of that confrontation turning deadly.
Which is why I suspect the Neighborhood Watch rules do not include having guns.
 
But he's the neighborhood watch captain, and you aren't.

He would naturally follow Martin if the dispatcher said that to him, I'd think.

He'd see it as his job.

Why would Zimmerman see it as "his job" to violate the rules of the neighborhood watch? That would be the opposite of doing his job.
 
Yes, one could argue that. It would be a ridiculously stupid argument, but one could make it.
I think it is an interesting detail. The dispatcher repeatedly told GZ to let me him know If TM did anything else and then when TM ran the dispatcher asked GZ "which way is he running?". At that point GZ was about to lose sight of TM (and did moments later) so he actually needed to pursue TM in order to answer the dispatcher's question with meaningful accuracy. I bet this will be brought up in court.
 
Last edited:
Your point is fine as far as it goes.

What if Zimmerman testifies that Martin is the one who pulled the gun? Zimmerman's gun, I mean.

I think that is going to be part of the story we get from Zimmerman.
It would not obviate the fact that there was no evidence that a crime was being committed nor obviate the fact that there was no imminent danger and therefore no pressing need for GZ to follow TM.
 
Conflict of interest can be a real pain in the ass.

What's weird is that the conflict of interest would seem to favor the defense:
During a 10-minute status hearing that was held Friday in Seminole County, attorney Mark O'Mara said the filing of the motion to have Circuit Court Judge Jessica Recksiedler removed may be "imminent."

O'Mara became Zimmerman's attorney after being recommended by attorney Mark NeJame, who was contacted by Zimmerman's family. Recksiedler's husband works at NeJame's law firm.

If anyone was going to file that motion, I would expect it to be the prosecution.
 
Oh, sarcasm, and so early in the morning. Fighting is not legal so that's a ridiculous question. However, just because 1 person struck the first blow doesn't mean the other person is allowed to pull out the gun and shoot him. A fist vs. a gun is not equal force.

However we're not talkin a single punch, we're talking a beating that proceeded for near enough to a minute or longer.
 
Why do you keep harping on that ? GZ did exactly as recommended by every neighborhood watch program in calling the police. He went against every NW program recommendation by following TM.

So by the those same neighborhood watch rules you are citing, can we agree that Zimmerman violated them when, with a gun, he exited his car to follow Martin?

Yes, see above.
 
The thing is that following someone does not put their life in danger. What might put their life in danger is their taking exception to your being there and attacking you. Blaming the follower for the followees bad reaction and decisions is pretty much blaming the victim. Consider this. Had TM actually gotten hold of GZ's gun and shot him (which according to the states was actually 4.4 times more likely than what did happen) would you consider that because GZ was following TM he got what he deserved?

We aren't going to agree on this. Pursuing a stranger, particularly in the manner Zimmerman apparently did, gives the other person a very strong reason to believe they are in danger. Doing so is, again, insanely aggressive, and the sort of behavior I would only expect from someone who consciously wants to, at the very least, frighten other people, and who more likely wants to rob or harm the person they're following.

I'll state quite flatly, if someone were to follow me around, and particularly if they were to approach me and stick their hand in their pocket as Zimmerman supposedly did, I would beat them until they stopped moving, and I wouldn't feel the slightest remorse for it.
 
I'm talking about the dispatcher's requests about what Martin was doing, and which way he was running.

I'd probably try to do what it seems like the dispatcher is asking me to do.

But you said Zimmerman might see it as "his job"? How is that his job?
 
Whether GZ was a member of Neighborhood Watch, their rules are sensible, and it was foolish for GZ to follow TM. The result of that foolish decision demonstrate exactly why untrained individuals should leave actually confronting a "suspicious" person to the police.

There is no evidence that GZ planned to or did confront TM, in fact he claims that it was TM that confronted him. We just don't know what happened and who confronted whom.
 
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