Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[TheL8Elvis]

We do know that TM had no reason to interact with GZ that didn't flow from GZ's misapprehensions of the situation. We do know that GZ was wrong about targeting TM and aggressively pursued his mistake. That's the meat of what I claim. What do you think is wrong with it?

Nothing is wrong with it.

However, I think it has no bearing on whether he is guilty or not.

 

[eerok]

I don't know what TM was doing or if a NW person would consider TM suspicious.

What would make him suspicious? Walking while black? Talking on a headset?

To be fair, I've been fooled by people on headsets—but only momentarily. At my work (hospital, night shift) I do quick evaluations of people I encounter to decide if they're delerious/demented, in need of assistance, up to no good, etc. People with headsets have very briefly seemed delerious/demented to me on occasion, but I always catch on quick. You see, when you're deprived of the context someone else is engaged in, you don't know what's going on.

The point here I guess is that I catch on soon enough and certainly no one has been shot and killed due to any conceptual miscue by me. If only GZ could say the same.

I don't think GZ was ever going to go near TM that evening.

So your theory is that TM morphed from some kid walking home from the store with Skittles in his pocket to some nefarious killer? Please explain, because I don't get it.

Just to be fair, I don't think GZ intended a violent confrontation, either, but where do you think it came from? I fully accept that GZ would've been overjoyed if the police arrived and TM turned out to be a burglar casing the neighborhood.

But c'mon, it's not that hard. TM was not a criminal—he was just some kid walking by and talking on his cell. Why do you think he'd want to attack GZ if GZ hadn't provoked him?

This is a big question. This is why people are so hostile toward GZ and are calling for his blood. There's just nothing to indicate that TM was anything more than a victim here.

 

[crimresearch]

We do know that TM had no reason to interact with GZ that didn't flow from GZ's misapprehensions of the situation. We do know that GZ was wrong about targeting TM and aggressively pursued his mistake. That's the meat of what I claim. What do you think is wrong with it?



No, what I offered as facts are indeed facts. TM was just a kid going home from a trip to the store, not a criminal casing the neighborhood. TM had no reason other than the aggressive actions of GZ to interact with him at all.

Do you have something to offer to the contrary?

You are presenting your speculations and opinions as though they were a given, and as though they were based on proven facts.
The fact is, that you can only imagine what someone may or may not have been thinking, or may or may not have done.

Isn't the elephant in the room here that TM had no reason other than self-defence to interact at all with GZ?...
...If someone like GZ came onto me in a threatening manner on the street at night, perhaps trying to restrain me forcibly for some reason I couldn't understand...
...I think the only mistake TM made was not getting the gun first.

You weren't there, you aren't psychic, and you haven't demonstrated any special insight.

And moving the goal posts to an entirely different claim (TM was just going home), and pretending that I'm arguing against *that* does nothing useful.

 

[eerok]

I think it has no bearing on whether he is guilty or not.

Yeah, it does. There's no objective evidence at all that TM was doing anything more than defending himself.

This is the crux of the whole thing. We have no evidence at all that TM did anything wrong, but we do have evidence that GZ was operating on a serious misapprehension of what was going on.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

What would make him suspicious? Walking while black? Talking on a headset?

The neighborhood watch sites list many non-illegal 'suspicious' activities that are very subjective. Just because GZ did not enumerate all of the activites does not imply none of them occurred. Or perhaps he just has a suspicios feeling.

http://blog.ctnews.com/crimewatch/2011/12/21/know-how-to-report-suspicious-activities/

For years one of the cornerstones of Neighborhood Watch has been the reporting of suspicious activities and individuals to the police....

What exactly is a “suspicious activity”?

A stranger loitering in your neighborhood or a vehicle cruising the streets repeatedly; someone peering into cars or windows

ETA:
http://www.google.com/search?q=neighborhood+watch+report+suspicious+activities

Feel free to find numerous references admonishing you to call the authorities for suspicious activities like loitering.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Yeah, it does. There's no objective evidence at all that TM was doing anything more than defending himself.

This is the crux of the whole thing. We have no evidence at all that TM did anything wrong, but we do have evidence that GZ was operating on a serious misapprehension of what was going on.

And there is no evidence, as testified to by the Lead investigator, that GZ was doing more than defending himself.

THAT is the crux of the whole thing.

 

[johnny karate]

It's pixelated, but it looks like a busted up nose to me, in case anyone hasn't seen it yet.

http://www.wagist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/nose.jpg

That claim was made a while back. When it was pointed out that Zimmerman had a bit of an irregularly-shaped nose to begin with, everyone fell back to the position of "impossible to tell anything on that video".

 

[johnny karate]

Just like you used the conspiracy theorist label against the people who disagreed with you about the forensic audio "experts" as well:

So you have evidence for your various allegations? I look forward to seeing it.

Anyways, here is an article posted on Crump's own firm's website:

It’s likely that Martin’s death, which resulted in the arrest and indictment Wednesday of confessed shooter George Zimmerman, would never have crowded into the national consciousness had it not been for Martin’s family, its lawyers and an enterprising PR man.

For the most part, the Martin story found the media, rather than vice versa. Outraged by the lack of an arrest, the Martin camp lobbied news outlets to examine what had happened that night in Sanford. Eventually, the media did, and the story moved like a fast-burning fuse, leaping from traditional news sources to the blogosphere and social media.

A pivotal, if little-known, figure in the Martin story’s development was Ryan Julison, an Orlando public relations executive who began working with the Martin family at the behest of its attorneys, Benjamin Crump and Natalie Jackson.
http://parkscrump.com/trayvon-martin-story-found-the-media/

Fascinating. But how does Celox fit into all this? I think Celox is the key.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

That claim was made a while back. When it was pointed out that Zimmerman had a bit of an irregularly-shaped nose to begin with, everyone fell back to the position of "impossible to tell anything on that video".

Well, not everyone

 

[eerok]

You are presenting your speculations and opinions as though they were a given, and as though they were based on proven facts.
The fact is, that you can only imagine what someone may or may not have been thinking, or may or may not have done.

Yeah, ya caught me. We all know that Skittles taste like crap unless they're dipped in the blood of the Neighborhood Watch. Obviously TM was out for murder when he went to the store. Nothing else makes sense.

Seriously, though, you're trying to tell me that TM had a good reason to kill GZ? Talk about no evidence, this isn't even rational as a hypothetical.

 

[johnny karate]

We don't know that. Who knows how Mr. neighborhood watch perceived TM.

Actually, we have a very good idea of how Zimmerman perceived Martin. It's on the 911 tape.

"This guy looks like he's up to no good."

"... he's on drugs or something."

"These ******** always get away."

I know we all have to steer as far way as possible from the idea that Zimmerman might have "profiled" Martin, but to pretend that Zimmerman did not adopt a negative or hostile attitude towards Martin is a position flatly contradicted by Zimmerman's own words.

 

[eerok]

The neighborhood watch sites list many non-illegal 'suspicious' activities that are very subjective. Just because GZ did not enumerate all of the activites does not imply none of them occurred. Or perhaps he just has a suspicios feeling.

That's great. Call the cops. Report the suspicious character. Job done.

Oh, wait. GZ is frustrated because those beepbeeps always get away. Gun is loaded. Let's go.

Big mistake. Dead kid.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

That's great. Call the cops. Report the suspicious character. Job done.

Oh, wait. GZ is frustrated because those beepbeeps always get away. Gun is loaded. Let's go.

Big mistake. Dead kid.

I agree. Does that make what he did illegal ?

Do you have an argument to make, or just appeals to emotion ?

 

[johnny karate]

The neighborhood watch sites list many non-illegal 'suspicious' activities that are very subjective. Just because GZ did not enumerate all of the activites does not imply none of them occurred.

When it's been firmly established that Zimmerman wasn't part of any official neighborhood watch program and therefore probably didn't actually receive any of the training, and furthermore violated two pretty important rules of the neighborhood watch, I don't see how reasonable it is to assume he might have been consulting the neighborhood watch handbook on the night in question.

Or perhaps he just has a suspicios feeling.

I'll go with this option. That just leaves one to wonder how reasonable the suspicions of George Zimmerman are.

 

[johnny karate]

Well, not everyone

Zing!

 

[Giz]

Actually, we have a very good idea of how Zimmerman perceived Martin. It's on the 911 tape.

"This guy looks like he's up to no good."

"... he's on drugs or something."

"These ******** always get away."

I know we all have to steer as far way as possible from the idea that Zimmerman might have "profiled" Martin, but to pretend that Zimmerman did not adopt a negative or hostile attitude towards Martin is a position flatly contradicted by Zimmerman's own words.

Was it reasonable? A recent spate of burglaries, then a stranger strolling through the neighborhood, "looking like he's on drugs"/on a headset... those are the kind of things that police tell neighborhood watches to keep an eye out for and call in about.

 

[WildCat]

So your theory is that TM morphed from some kid walking home from the store with Skittles in his pocket to some nefarious killer? Please explain, because I don't get it.

Just to be fair, I don't think GZ intended a violent confrontation, either, but where do you think it came from? I fully accept that GZ would've been overjoyed if the police arrived and TM turned out to be a burglar casing the neighborhood.

But c'mon, it's not that hard. TM was not a criminal—he was just some kid walking by and talking on his cell. Why do you think he'd want to attack GZ if GZ hadn't provoked him?

This is a big question. This is why people are so hostile toward GZ and are calling for his blood. There's just nothing to indicate that TM was anything more than a victim here.

So you're claiming that Martin was both non-violent and violent at the same time?

 

[WildCat]

Yeah, it does. There's no objective evidence at all that TM was doing anything more than defending himself.

Defending himself from what? And your evidence is...?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

And I thought I heard on the news last week that the prosecutors decision to charge 2nd-degree murder was based (at least partly) on Martin's mother claiming she could identify the scream on the 911 recording? That's some pretty weak evidence.

In case you missed it:

Or, as Det. Gilbreath put it,

GILBREATH: The "Orlando Sentinel" had someone do it and the FBI has had someone do it [a voice analysis].

O'MARA: Is that part of your investigation?

GILBREATH: Yes.

O'MARA: Has that given any insight as to the voice?

GILBREATH: No.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

That was an issue in the 12 year old murder trial. Advocates were supposedly fighting so the 12 year old didn't have to be led in front of the jury in shackles. The judge, in that case, ordered the shackles be removed. I guess that's the part I don't understand. I wouldn't call that an unwarranted attempt to polish his image, I call the opposite an unwarranted attempt to be seen as guilty based on the image.

Ya think?

Maybe we should pass a compromise law so we don't bias juries or the public too much in either direction. They don't get to wear suits but they don't have to appear in a prison outfit and shackles either. Instead they should have to appear in grungy blue jeans and a Tshirt. You know, sort of like the guy you see on the street that is dresses in a manner that you can't tell if he's a minimum wager worker or Mark Cuban out for a walk.

Better yet, maybe they should have to be naked. No clothes bias at all.