Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[marplots]

I saw a beautiful woman out walking her dog the other day. I was curious to see whether she would head toward the park or just circle the block. So I followed her around the corner.

Little did I know, and failed to tell my wife later, that by following her at some distance I had become physically involved with another woman. This thread has enlightened me to the error. For what I thought was simple observation to gain more information was really something much more sinister.

But perhaps it was just the activity of walking the dog I was physically involved with? I could tell my wife I had no interest in the woman, but only the activity, and my involvement stopped there.

What is the activity that GZ got involved in rather than observing? Was it "some guy wandering around suspiciously?" It seems a poor notion of neighborhood watch to say you can't change your position to watch but have to stay wherever you happened to be. Did the neighbors who looked out the window to see what the noise was get physically involved in the activity as well? It should be perfectly legit to observe someone in a public place, even if that means changing your location to do so.

The critical thing for me is who made the final approach and contact. The physical confrontation part. The hitting part and the shooting part.

 

[This is The End]

Not sure why I used basketball earlier, there are fouls for contact.

Baseball.

In baseball you are physically involved with the activity of baseball. You make contact with no humans at all. Though you do touch bats and balls.

How about track & field. Running.

When sprinting in a race with other contestants you are surely physically involved in an activity and you are touching no humans or anything at all.

If you were watching the race from the stands (or a truck) you would not be physically involved in the activity.

The activity Z reported was someone walking around. When Z joined the walking around surely he became physically involved in that activity.

If the activity someone reports is a hostage situation. Then negotiating with the hostage taker or talking to the hostages surely would be becoming physically involved in that activity.

Again, I am not convinced that sentence means what WildCat is trying to spin it to mean. That is, that physical contact with a human is required when the direct object is an activity.

 

[Rare Truth]

In this context

It's pretty darn clear what the SPD meant.

They SPECIFICALLY told NW volunteers to NOT get physically involved with any suspicious activity they report. They specifically told them that is the job of law enforcement.

By following "the suspect" into a potentially volatile situation with a gun, G not only put his own safety at risk, he put his neighbors safety at risk.

It's PREDICTABLY dangerous. And look what happened.


He thought he was on drugs.
He thought he was armed.
He thought he was a criminal.

What reasonable person goes in pursuit of this?

 

[WildCat]

They SPECIFICALLY told NW volunteers to NOT get physically involved with any suspicious activity they report.

Good thing Zimmermasn didn't do that, yes?

 

[WildCat]

Do you seriously not know the difference between a person and an activity, or are you just joining in on the dishonesty?

Knowing what terms mean doesn't make one dishonest.

Insisting terms mean things they don't mean, however, is an example of deep ignorance. And your ignorance is not evidence of dishonesty by me or anyone else.

 

[Dancing David]

When did Zimmerman drive while on the phone with the cops?

Why did Zimmerman jump out and chase Martin, and state that he was following Martin, if he weren't following Martin?

If Zimmerman wanted a street name, why didn't he just drive to the corner?

When did the dispatcher instruct Zimmerman to keep an eye on Martin?

When did Zimmerman state that the cops should meet him by his SUV?

When on earth did Martin come out of the alley, circle Zimmerman's car, and then run back into the alley?

How did Zimmerman end up south of Martin, who had supposedly punched Zimmerman *frm* the south, and knocked him north?

When, prior to stating "he's running", did Zimmerman claim to have lost sight of Martin?

Did you happen to listen to this tape, would you care to actually comment on GZ's statements, or just play twenty questions?

Which statements in the tape are an issue for you?

 

[Rare Truth]

Good thing Zimmermasn didn't do that, yes?

That must explain why his ass is in jail right now.

 

[Dancing David]

What an absurd attempt to diminish and deride the poster's questions. It's insulting.

All of those questions come directly from the mass of GZ's conflicting statements.

Then instead of arm waving, provide us with the actual quotes by GZ, otherwise it is just a bunch of questions.

So in the tape, which statements are you specifically referring to, in this round you may NOT use media reports and speculation, you must use ONLY the statements of GZ as presented in evidence tapes.

Sop in the evidence tapes, not media reports, which statements do you feel are contradictory?

 

[Amazer]

Good thing Zimmermasn didn't do that, yes?

I can see the 'I just happen to travel in the same direction' excuse playing really well with a jury.

 

[Dancing David]

Bullet trajectory - way off
.

How exactly, what is the actual evidence and what is 'way off'?

 

[Rare Truth]

Then instead of arm waving, provide us with the actual quotes by GZ, otherwise it is just a bunch of questions.
...

If you can't be bothered to listen and watch the current discovery dump, then why should someone be bothered to hold your hand and walk you through it?

 

[Giz]

It seems a poor notion of neighborhood watch to say you can't change your position to watch but have to stay wherever you happened to be. Did the neighbors who looked out the window to see what the noise was get physically involved in the activity as well?

Only if they moved to another window to get a better look. Or swiveled their eyeballs. Or picked up a phone. NW is supposed to remain stationary and use mental telepathy to call in any issues. Anything else is physical dammit!

It should be perfectly legit to observe someone in a public place, even if that means changing your location to do so.

A right to peacefully observe strangers moving through your neighborhood without getting attacked?!

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Not sure why I used basketball earlier, there are fouls for contact.

Baseball.

In baseball you are physically involved with the activity of baseball. You make contact with no humans at all. Though you do touch bats and balls.

How about track & field. Running.

When sprinting in a race with other contestants you are surely physically involved in an activity and you are touching no humans or anything at all.

If you were watching the race from the stands (or a truck) you would not be physically involved in the activity.

The activity Z reported was someone walking around. When Z joined the walking around surely he became physically involved in that activity.

If the activity someone reports is a hostage situation. Then negotiating with the hostage taker or talking to the hostages surely would be becoming physically involved in that activity.

Again, I am not convinced that sentence means what WildCat is trying to spin it to mean. That is, that physical contact with a human is required when the direct object is an activity.

Aside from (arguably) things like thinking, imagining, etc - everything is a 'physical activity'.

You are making arbitrary distinctions to suit your scenario.

"If you were watching the race from the stands (or a truck) you would not be physically involved in the activity."

Everyone at the track is physically involved in the activity of going to the racetrack for the race

Also, Marplots dog walking for example.

I think a reasonable person could interpret physically involved as, for example, getting involved in a confrontation. Like the witness 'John' - who stepped outside to get 'physically involved' with GZ and TM by yelling at them but didn't run over and try to break up the fight, but ran inside to call the police. By your definition, he was physically involved. I think if you asked someone not involved in this discussion if John was 'physically involved' - they would clearly say no.

 

[Rare Truth]

Autopsy report: The trajectory of bullet: Directly front to back.

Example with visual of Z's description - a similar "mounting":

Note also Z said TM had one hand on his mouth as he pulled the trigger.
* No Gun Shot Residue on either Zimmerman's jacket or shirt.
------------------------------------------------------

"We have Mr. Zimmerman's statement, we have the shell casing, and we have the body." -Gilbreath

 

[Unabogie]

Autopsy report: The trajectory of bullet: Directly front to back.

Example with visual of Z's description - a similar "mounting":

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/who007/Decorated images/tmbody3.jpg

Note also Z said TM had one hand on his mouth as he pulled the trigger.
* No Gun Shot Residue on either Zimmerman's jacket or shirt.
------------------------------------------------------

"We have Mr. Zimmerman's statement, we have the shell casing, and we have the body." -Gilbreath

Notice how in that position, it's physically impossible to reach a gun in your waistband.

 

[Rare Truth]

Another reminder: NO defensive wounds on Zimmerman. None.

Wounds so minor on Zimmerman they did not even require a bandage on the scene.

Only injury to the person who delivered such imminent deathly wounds, blow after blow after blow after blow after blow:

The ONLY injury. That and the puncture wound to his heart that Zimmerman delivered and ended the teenager's life.

 

[Rare Truth]

Notice how in that position, it's physically impossible to reach a gun in your waistband.

I brought that up earlier, and was called a Conspiracy nut.

 

[johnny karate]

Knowing what terms mean doesn't make one dishonest.

Insisting terms mean things they don't mean, however, is an example of deep ignorance. And your ignorance is not evidence of dishonesty by me or anyone else.

That you refuse to state what term we're actually discussing is quite telling.

Clearly you don't want to acknowledge your lie, or get caught telling it again.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Notice how in that position, it's physically impossible to reach a gun in your waistband.

Let me ask then...

If what GZ described that night and the next day is physically impossible, why was there any doubt about arresting him ?

Why haven't we heard anything about being shot from a different scenario/position ?

Where is the big red flag in the forensics ?

I haven't seen anyone credible suggest that the shooting happened any other way than with TM on top of GZ, just as "john" reported seeing them before he heard the gun shot. I would think if it was obviously impossible, there would be a lot of experts explaining how it really happened, not just random posts on an Internet forum. Have some links ?

 

[Unabogie]

By the way, Zimmerman got "physically involved" when he "physically" left his car and walked or ran after Trayvon. By his own admission, he followed him. By the phone call with DD, he followed him. The only place where the stories diverge is that George claims that when the dispatcher told him not to follow, he complied, but still ended up next to Trayvon whilst looking for a street sign. By the way, is there a street sign on that other street? I don't think there is, since the T exits away from any corner. In fact, he parked his car right on a corner, and typically there's a street sign there.

In fact, in his reenactment video, he says as they approach where he parked, "I parked right over by that sign there". I can't tell what the sign says. Anyone know?

As an aside, does anyone want to speak to some of George's inconsistencies?

Listen to the NEN call again. George claims in his re-enactment (RE) that he first talks to the dispatcher while he's parked at the clubhouse. As soon as he starts talking, he claims that Trayvon is checking him out. That's about 1 minute into the call. In the RE, he claims that the dispatcher told him to follow Trayvon. That never happened. But also the "checking out" happens while he's still at the clubhouse. Or says he is. In the RE, he claims all this took place right outside the T. And it takes much longer than one minute to get over there, for Trayvon to get around that corner, come back, and circle his car. All of those actions don't fit the phone call at all. In the course of 1 minute:

1. He says Trayvon is near 1440 Retreat View.
2. George parks into the clubhouse.
3. George talks to the dispatcher, who tells him to follow (which didn't happen)
4. George drives to Twin Trees and parks.
5. George sees Trayvon round the corner to his house.
6. Trayvon comes back around the corner and approaches George.
7. Trayvon circles George's car.

All in the space of about a minute. And this is the kid "walking about, looking at houses".


Does this make sense to anyone?


Call:


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/vide...e-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin


RE:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4


I think his story doesn't add up. I think he didn't see Trayvon where he claimed to. The timeline doesn't work.

ETA: Listening to the NEN again. In the call, he says he's at the clubhouse, and that's when Trayvon is coming to check him out. In the RE, he places that at the T. He completely changed his story. Wow.