Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Cylinder]

A couple hundred pages ago I was called out for saying Zimmerman "decided to take a gun and pursue him" because it was taken to mean that Zimmerman armed himself with the express purpose to pursue Martin.

I know these discussions evolve at times to pissing contests, but you seem fairly willing to discuss facts and evidence.

The thing is, that the law says two very different things about the snenario where an armed Zimmerman is invloved in a confrontation and the scenario where Zimmerman is involved in a confrontation and then arms himself. I know that's not exactly your claim in that instance, but the disctinction is not meaningless all the same.

It's the same with the current iteration. Zimmerman confronted Martin is legally disctinct from Zimmerman and Martin were involved in a confrontation.

 

[curi0us]

Fair enough. You did allow for the possibility of Zimmerman's injuries being exaggerated. I apologize for suggesting you didn't.

So with all the information that's been presented what do you think is the most likely regarding Zimmerman's scalp wounds: exaggeration or Celox? Or is there now a third alternative you'd like to offer?

There was always an alternative and I had already mentioned it.

I previously said, "maybe they used gauze (regular or celox) and the wound stopped bleeding (for whatever reason) and the police wanted to take him to the station so they figured he was good to go."

Note that was before the bloody picture has even come out so now this is all silly to me. We now know for sure GZ did have bleeding head wounds and we also know they weren't bandaged in the police surveillance video so something stopped the bleeding. That part is now undeniable.

I really don't see what the big deal about the bandages is at this point.

I'm not sure where you think the confusion lies. You introduced the Celox theory to specifically address the nature of the lacerations cuts on Zimmerman's scalp. Concussions and screams never entered into the conversation.

I was speaking to the "severity of Zimmerman's injuries" as you asked.

Your prior post:

So did you want to stick with the improbable, or maybe admit to the possibility that the claims regarding the severity of Zimmerman's injuries were exaggerated?

I believe the most severe of Zimmerman's injuries was a probable concussion. Not only has that not been exaggerated it's gotten little attention.

The secondary injuries are the head lacerations and the broken nose. I will await the medical report on those but I've seen no reason to conclude either has been exaggerated at this point.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

It's the same with the current iteration. Zimmerman confronted Martin is legally disctinct from Zimmerman and Martin were involved in a confrontation.

Seems to me it comes down to awareness of the fact that language is very powerful and how we express things can have great meaning. I think the issue with the 911 operator is the best example of that.

1. "The police operator ordered GZ not to pursue". I find it fascinating how many things are communicated in that sentence. By using the word "police" it implies he was ordered by an authority, "ordered" of course is self-evident, and "pursued" suggests facts not in evidence.

2. "The 911 operator advised GZ that he did not have to follow him."

Seems to me #1 is meant to do nothing but skew perceptions, while #2 is a much more objective representation of the facts. Of course I'm not claiming I haven't done any "skewing" myself, we all do it to different extents, sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally.

 

[AlBell]

I'm not talking about what is relevant to law. I'm talking about what is relevant to me. There is a reason it would be terrible for me to be on a jury in this case: I'm biased.

You assume my issue with Zimmerman is his race? Why?

Based on your post I surmised it, as you did for GZ. Neither view is supported by any actual, you know, evidence.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Based on your post I surmised it, as you did for GZ. Neither view is supported by any actual, you know, evidence.

He walked right into that one didn't he .

 

[Giz]

Choosing to follow someone you believe is suspicious, when there is no evidence that a crime has been committed or that there is any imminent danger, and initiating contact when you have a gun is, IMO, reckless.

Just don't do it.

Do we know that he did initiate contact? I thought that who actually confronted whom (and who first laid hands upon the other) was one of the big unknowns...

 

[Giz]

If you say so.

There just seems to be an awful lot of hypersensitivity around here about the use of words and terms that might be viewed as inflammatory towards Zimmerman.

A couple hundred pages ago I was called out for saying Zimmerman "decided to take a gun and pursue him" because it was taken to mean that Zimmerman armed himself with the express purpose to pursue Martin. Apparently, anything more suggestive than Zimmerman completely forgetting he was armed before approaching Martin for a friendly chat was deemed off-limits.

That matters because if GZ usually went about armed then him being armed doesn't imply that he thought he'd need it (or at least, be any more likely to need it than on a usual day). If he had specifically taken an unusual step of arming himself then that might imply a certain mindset (i.e. that he was foreseeing (and accepting) violence) on his part.

 

[triforcharity]

I said I read it in an article somewhere, not in the article that I posted. The facts of the case are widely reported and not in dispute. As for the prison issue I looked it up, she had him being housed in an adult jail, but with other juveniles charged as adults.

There is no way in hell this kid should be being charged as an adult or facing life in prison.

A child will never be housed with adults. The DA doesn't make the decision in Florida as to housing, that is up to the Sheriff typically.

I will agree that a 12 year old who did what is accused, should not be charged with a life felony.

But, it's off topic. If you'd like to start another thread on it, I'd gladly post.

 

[triforcharity]

link

You do realize that just because they are in the same building, that doesn't mean they're in the same cell, right?

 

[Giz]

As far as I am personally concerned he had it coming just by being in a neighborhood watch program. I've never liked them and never will. Bunch of no good bullies that do nothing except harass people that aren't doing anything wrong. I'd really like to see them outlawed but I can't figure out a way to effectively do it.

Yeah, there's a sweet little old lady just down the road that keeps a watch out for strangers in our neighborhood (and also hosts neighborhood potluck on 4th July etc)... no doubt it's because she loves throwing her weight around! Damn bullies!!! Oughta be a law against it....

 

[RandFan]

Do we know that he did initiate contact?

No. And I try to make that as abundantly clear as often as I can. Sorry I failed this last attempt. I've stated that based on what I do know there is a plausible scenario where GZ did not initiate contact. In fact, based on what I know it is possible that not only did TM initiate contact but TM attacked GZ. I do not think trying to keep TM in sight was unreasonable given that he was asked to report on what TM was doing.

 

[AlBell]

Do we know that he did initiate contact? I thought that who actually confronted whom (and who first laid hands upon the other) was one of the big unknowns...

Unknown indeed.

As I read RandFan's posts he would be happiest if incontrovertible evidence of GZ hunting blacks to shoot was found, so the charge could be upped to murder 1.

 

[This is The End]

"pursued" suggests facts not in evidence.

Are you suggesting that when this exchange transpired:

Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Ok

That Z was not pursuing M? You do realize that the word "follow" is one of the definitions for "pursue" right?

 

[RandFan]

Unknown indeed.

As I read RandFan's posts he would be happiest if incontrovertible evidence of GZ hunting blacks to shoot was found, so the charge could be upped to murder 1.

Not only is this against forum rules but it is unfair to me and without basis. I do not know that Zimmerman is guilty of anything and I have repeatedly said "if" to refer to the scenario that I would find Zimmerman culpable.

IMO: The problem lies in the fact that Zimmerman will not likely be convicted even if his actions were reckless. If the simple fact is that he decided to follow and confront Martin while he had a gun believing Martin to be suspicious, that would not be considered reckless. I think it should be. If the premise is correct then I think it painfully obvious that Zimmerman substantively contributed to the death of Zimmerman and his actions were unnecessary. And the message I'm getting is that it simply doesn't matter. Zimmerman has a right to act in such a way as to increase the likelihood of harm or death unnecessarily. He has no duty to try to avoid a confrontation.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

TM T-mobile log

This is the first I have seen of the complete t-mobile bill Crump waved around at his 'connect the dots' press conference.

(transcript http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/20/cnr.03.html)

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf

Not sure if there is anything useful or not in there or not.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Are you suggesting that when this exchange transpired:

That Z was not pursuing M? You do realize that the word "follow" is one of the definitions for "pursue" right?

Sorry, you are correct. I was thinking of the fact that we don't know if GZ followed him after that, that is, I believe GZ claims he was coming back to his vehicle.

Edit:actually rereading what I wrote I'm not sure I was incorrect. The fact is when people say that "The police operator ordered GZ not to pursue", it does in fact imply that GZ continued to pursue after being told not to, whereas I believe that GZ in fact claims he did not.

 

[sgtbaker]

Unknown indeed.

As I read RandFan's posts he would be happiest if incontrovertible evidence of GZ hunting blacks to shoot was found, so the charge could be upped to murder 1.

I don't know where you got that impression but given I have had quite a few exchanges with Randfan, throughout this thread, I can say that it is flat out false. Even in areas where we haven't agreed, he's maintained a respectable level of skepticism. He's shown a considerable level of flexibility to new ideas and evidence and quite honestly, the last person I would make such an accusation to.

 

[sgtbaker]

If you say so.

There just seems to be an awful lot of hypersensitivity around here about the use of words and terms that might be viewed as inflammatory towards Zimmerman.

A couple hundred pages ago I was called out for saying Zimmerman "decided to take a gun and pursue him" because it was taken to mean that Zimmerman armed himself with the express purpose to pursue Martin. Apparently, anything more suggestive than Zimmerman completely forgetting he was armed before approaching Martin for a friendly chat was deemed off-limits.

And then just recently, I was accused of "making things up" when I used the terms "relentless" and "vicious" in describing how Zimmerman's father recounted the incident, despite the fact that both words were quite apt.

That someone would then object to the use of the word "confront" wouldn't surprise me in the least.

You mean like laceration?

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I don't know where you got that impression but given I have had quite a few exchanges with Randfan, throughout this thread, I can say that it is flat out false. Even in areas where we haven't agreed, he's maintained a respectable level of skepticism. He's shown a considerable level of flexibility to new ideas and evidence and quite honestly, the last person I would make such an accusation to.

Maybe AlBell confused him with Johnny Karate or Travis or Lefty Seargent.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Are you suggesting that when this exchange transpired:

That Z was not pursuing M? You do realize that the word "follow" is one of the definitions for "pursue" right?

All pursuing is following. All following is not pursuing.