Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[bookworm]

...

And by the way, Martin isn't being accused of merely starting a fight. He's being accused of attempted murder. And a rather savage attempt .

Just want to point out that believing that Martin was banging Zimmerman's head on the ground doesn't necessarily mean believing he was deliberately trying to kill him. I believe he was doing it but I don't believe he meant to kill him. Teenagers often don't realize the enormity of what they do. So speaking for myself, I'm not accusing M of attempted murder, I simply believe he was angry at being followed and angry at being considered suspicious and wanted a fight because of it. I seriously doubt anyone else thinks he intended to kill Z either.

 

[Dan O.]

And no reason to act surprised that a teen may have done something stupid, like stop heading for home and stop and turn around to confront the person following him....

Are you making a claim there? Why would it be stupid for a teen to stop heading for home when they are in their own communal back yard and they are on the phone talking to their girl friend. Wouldn't it in fact be stupid to take that private conversation home where it could be overheard by the younger future brother in law? Why would it be stupid to turn around and confront someone who appears to have been following you? Here again, stupid would be to keep your back turned on a potential danger. In fact, Trayvon appears to have controlled the situation quite well for a kid. He had the larger and older threat on the ground and pinned for a couple of minutes until an adult showed up.

What's the proper way for a confrontation that turns violent to end? In hindsight, releasing the threat before it was fully controlled by the authorities resulted in the threat being able to pull a hidden weapon and kill Trayvon. Trayvon was in position to have neutralized the threat which would have saved his own life. Is is what kids should be taught to do?

 

[johnny karate]

And no reason to act surprised that a teen may have done something stupid, like stop heading for home and stop and turn around to confront the person following him....

...and then attempt to brutally murder that person without provocation.

Do you find that surprising at all?

Or should we should just consider a cold-blooded murder attempt an act of mundane teenage stupidity as well?

 

[eerok]

no reason to act surprised that a teen may have done something stupid, like stop heading for home and stop and turn around to confront the person following him....

If it's reasonable to shoot some kid dead for one mistake in judgment, then is it not reasonable to incarcerate an unstable goofball who made several mistakes in judgment that ended in the death of an innocent passerby?

 

[Giz]

Why would it be stupid to turn around and confront someone who appears to have been following you? Here again, stupid would be to keep your back turned on a potential danger. In fact, Trayvon appears to have controlled the situation quite well for a kid. He had the larger and older threat on the ground and pinned for a couple of minutes until an adult showed up.

What's the proper way for a confrontation that turns violent to end? In hindsight, releasing the threat before it was fully controlled by the authorities resulted in the threat being able to pull a hidden weapon and kill Trayvon. Trayvon was in position to have neutralized the threat which would have saved his own life. Is is what kids should be taught to do?

Are you seriously suggesting that your advice to your child would be: IF someone is following you, and even though you can easily evade them,you should instead approach them and attempt to overpower them?

Somehow I don't think I'd advise any teen of mine to do that...


(This isn't even getting into a discussion of whether a short pudgy neighborhood watch guy keeping an eye on you could be viewed as threatening in the first place - though I guess it might be unsettling if you had a guilty conscience).

 

[bookworm]

Are you making a claim there? Why would it be stupid for a teen to stop heading for home when they are in their own communal back yard and they are on the phone talking to their girl friend. Wouldn't it in fact be stupid to take that private conversation home where it could be overheard by the younger future brother in law? Why would it be stupid to turn around and confront someone who appears to have been following you? Here again, stupid would be to keep your back turned on a potential danger. In fact, Trayvon appears to have controlled the situation quite well for a kid. He had the larger and older threat on the ground and pinned for a couple of minutes until an adult showed up.

What's the proper way for a confrontation that turns violent to end? In hindsight, releasing the threat before it was fully controlled by the authorities resulted in the threat being able to pull a hidden weapon and kill Trayvon. Trayvon was in position to have neutralized the threat which would have saved his own life. Is is what kids should be taught to do?

Do you truly, honestly and objectively feel that kids should be taught to confront and punch someone who is following them instead of quickly getting to a place of safety? I always taught my kids that if someone is following them go to the nearest person or house and tell them.

 

[marplots]

Do you truly, honestly and objectively feel that kids should be taught to confront and punch someone who is following them instead of quickly getting to a place of safety? I always taught my kids that if someone is following them go to the nearest person or house and tell them.

Did Martin call 911?

I hear a lot about threatening behavior on Z's part, but isn't he the only one who called the police?

 

[sgtbaker]

...and then attempt to brutally murder that person without provocation.

Do you find that surprising at all?

Or should we should just consider a cold-blooded murder attempt an act of mundane teenage stupidity as well?

I think Bookworm's response above is spot on. What we have here are two individuals that are not capable of mind reading. If Martin did attack Zimmerman first, it's not likely because Martin's intentions were to kill him in cold blood. For what ever reason (something we will never know) Martin ended up face to face with Zimmerman. If Zimmerman's story is true, Martin punched Zimmerman when he went for his phone, he very well could have been scared and acting in his own defense. Trying to see things from Trayvon's perspective, if I were truly afraid of someone and managed to gain the upper hand, you are damn right I would bang their head on the ground, repeatedly. I would want to neutralize them; make sure they are not going to get up.

From Zimmerman's perspective, again, going on the only story we have, he goes for his phone, gets punched in the face, and now his head is being slammed on the ground. Just like Martin has no idea what Zimmerman's intentions are, how far is he going to take this; Zimmerman has no idea what Martin's intentions are; how far he is going to take this. Remember, from Zimmerman's perspective, whether justified or not, the introduction began with suspicion and every moment after that, further confirmed his suspicion.

It just seems like such a strong need to make this some kind of zero sum situation where if one's intentions and actions are justifiable and understandable, the other's has to be evil. I just don't think it's that unreasonable for both to have been in fear for their life, as a result of the other person's actions. Given there appears to be an exceptional amount of emotion involved in both their actions, "cold blood" has nothing to do with this equation, at all.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

...and then attempt to brutally murder that person without provocation.

Do you find that surprising at all?

Or should we should just consider a cold-blooded murder attempt an act of mundane teenage stupidity as well?

Yes, we should absolutely consider that TM attacking GZ may have been an act of teenage stupidity. Because the facts of the case agree with that interpretation.

We should not just consider that, though, and none of the other surrounding circumstances.
So stop presenting a false dilemma.

We should also consider that GZ may have been acting in legal self defense because he feared great bodily harm from being attacked. I don't think anyone but you has made the claim of the attack being a brutal cold-blooded murder attempt

 

[TheL8Elvis]

If it's reasonable to shoot some kid dead for one mistake in judgment, then is it not reasonable to incarcerate an unstable goofball who made several mistakes in judgment that ended in the death of an innocent passerby?

So, TM is just a kid, and GZ is a unstable goofball. No, no bias there.

But to answer your question, no, it's not reasonable . It's not reasonable to argue that 'all lapses in judgement are the same, therefor all consequences should be the same.'

 

[johnny karate]

Just want to point out that believing that Martin was banging Zimmerman's head on the ground doesn't necessarily mean believing he was deliberately trying to kill him. I believe he was doing it but I don't believe he meant to kill him. Teenagers often don't realize the enormity of what they do. So speaking for myself, I'm not accusing M of attempted murder, I simply believe he was angry at being followed and angry at being considered suspicious and wanted a fight because of it. I seriously doubt anyone else thinks he intended to kill Z either.

I think Bookworm's response above is spot on.

Then it's clear that neither of you are very familiar with Zimmerman's version of events:

In an interview just after the shooting, Zimmerman told police that the struggle began when Martin "jumped out from the bushes" and punched him in the face, knocking him down.

"I started screaming for help. I couldn't see. I couldn't breathe," he said.

"He grabbed my head and started hitting it into the sidewalk," he said. "When he started doing that, I slid into the grass to try to get out from under him. ... I'm still yelling for help."

Martin, he said, put his hand over Zimmerman's mouth and nose and told him, "You're going to die tonight."

"When I slid, my jacket and my shirt came up. ... I felt his hand go down my side, and I thought he was going for my firearm, so I grabbed it immediately, and as he banged my head again, I just pulled out my firearm and shot him.

So not only was Martin beating Zimmerman severely, but he was also smothering him, and attempted to reach for his gun.

And if those actions don't make Martin's intent clear enough, while he was smothering Zimmerman and reaching for his gun, he announced, "You're gonna die tonight, *****f*****".

So maybe neither of you believe Martin was attempting to murder Zimmerman, but Zimmerman sure wants you to.

 

[johnny karate]

(This isn't even getting into a discussion of whether a short pudgy neighborhood watch guy keeping an eye on you could be viewed as threatening in the first place - though I guess it might be unsettling if you had a guilty conscience).

Do imagine Martin had some kind of magic ability that let him know Zimmerman was a "pudgy"(read: not a physical threat) "neighborhood watch guy"?

Because reality would indicate that all Martin saw or knew was that a strange man was following him home in the dark.

 

[Dan O.]

Are you seriously suggesting that your advice to your child would be: IF someone is following you, and even though you can easily evade them,you should instead approach them and attempt to overpower them?

What evidence do you have on who made the approach? According to George, he walked through the cut to Retreat View Circle and then was walking back to his truck when he encountered Trayvon. George's story gets into the bogus teratory because George never admits walking south. George must have gone south because that is where the fatal encounter occured.

From DeeDee, we hear that George had gotten in front of Trayvon. For George to get in front of Trayvon and them meet him south of the tee without walkin past him first, George would have to walk south on RVC before cutting back to the path. He would then be walkin north towards the tee, which incidentally is in the direction back to his truck, when he encounters Trayvon.



Somehow I don't think I'd advise any teen of mine to do that...


(This isn't even getting into a discussion of whether a short pudgy neighborhood watch guy keeping an eye on you could be viewed as threatening in the first place - though I guess it might be unsettling if you had a guilty conscience).[/QUOTE]

 

[Dan O.]

Do you truly, honestly and objectively feel that kids should be taught to confront and punch someone who is following them instead of quickly getting to a place of safety? I always taught my kids that if someone is following them go to the nearest person or house and tell them.

Trayvon was in a place of safety. He was in his own back yard surrounded by neighbors. One shout for help and at least a dozen neighbors could look out their back windows and see what was going on. When George approached, Trayvon asked: "why are you following me?" Is this not a reasonable thing to do? When the answer comes in the form of a sudden move that could be reaching for a weapon then fists can be expected to fly. Do you also teach your kids that they should try to outrun bullets when caught in the open and an assailant is drawing a weapon on them at close range?

 

[Dan O.]

Did Martin call 911?

I hear a lot about threatening behavior on Z's part, but isn't he the only one who called the police?

At what time should Trayvon have called 911? He saw a pervert in a car that might have been following him. Trayvon had a choice, he could call the cops and then spend hours explaining what he was doing, since he is still a minor, his parents would have to be called and he would have to deal with that too. Or, he could run to an area of relative safety where the car is not permitted to follow and then have the option of calling the cops if the situation were to escalate.

 

[eerok]

It just seems like such a strong need to make this some kind of zero sum situation where if one's intentions and actions are justifiable and understandable, the other's has to be evil. I just don't think it's that unreasonable for both to have been in fear for their life, as a result of the other person's actions. Given there appears to be an exceptional amount of emotion involved in both their actions, "cold blood" has nothing to do with this equation, at all.

I agree, but I think Zimmerman showed lapses of judgment serious enough that it's reasonable for him never to be allowed to touch a firearm again. You can't afford to condone stupidity of that magnitude: running around like an angry idiot while armed. If you have the right to be armed, then you have the responsibility to avoid instigating confrontations where you might use the weapon or lose control of it. It would be an utter failure to allow Zimmerman to walk away feeling that he'd done the right thing, when it's pretty clear that he didn't.

Should Zimmerman go to prison? Well, I'd be content if he got a long term of probation with mandatory therapy, and was permanently disarmed. He's not evil, but he's criminally stupid.

 

[johnny karate]

Yes, we should absolutely consider that TM attacking GZ may have been an act of teenage stupidity. Because the facts of the case agree with that interpretation.

We should not just consider that, though, and none of the other surrounding circumstances.
So stop presenting a false dilemma.

It's not a false dilemma. It's a presentation of the entire story. Not just the parts that can easily be hand-waved away as acts of teenage stupidity.

Zimmerman isn't claiming Martin merely attacked and punched him. He's claiming Martin made a violent and deliberate attempt to murder him.

That raises the stakes considerably higher than what an average teenager might do because of a lapse in judgment, and certainly is cause to scrutinize the veracity of what Zimmerman is claiming, as acts of such violence are not as commonplace as simply starting a fight.

We should also consider that GZ may have been acting in legal self defense because he feared great bodily harm from being attacked. I don't think anyone but you has made the claim of the attack being a brutal cold-blooded murder attempt

Along with other posters in this thread, you also seem to be unfamiliar with Zimmerman's version of events.

So I'll give it to you in his own words from the statement he gave to the police:

The suspect punched me in the face. I fell backwards onto my back. The suspect got on top of me. I yelled "Help" several times. The suspect told me "Shut the **** up", and I tried to sit upright. The suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the concrete sidewalk several times. I continued to yell "Help" and then I attempted to sit up. The suspect slammed my head into the sidewalk. My head felt like it was going to explode. I tried to slide out from under the suspect and continue to yell "Help". As I slid the suspect covered my nose and mouth and stopped my breathing. At this point I felt the suspect reach for my now-exposed firearm and say "Your[sic] gonna die tonight [expletive deleted]".

So what about the murder attempt being described in Zimmerman's statement do you not find brutal and cold-blooded?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It's not a false dilemma. It's a presentation of the entire story. Not just the parts that can easily be hand-waved away as acts of teenage stupidity.

Zimmerman isn't claiming Martin merely attacked and punched him. He's claiming Martin made a violent and deliberate attempt to murder him.

And in a fight, no one would ever say something like 'you're dead' or 'I'm going to kill you' ?? Whether the actual intention was to murder the other person or not ?

That raises the stakes considerably higher than what an average teenager might do because of a lapse in judgment, and certainly is cause to scrutinize the veracity of what Zimmerman is claiming, as acts of such violence are not as commonplace as simply starting a fight.

Along with other posters in this thread, you also seem to be unfamiliar with Zimmerman's version of events.

So I'll give it to you in his own words from the statement he gave to the police:

So what about the murder attempt being described in Zimmerman's statement do you not find brutal and cold-blooded?

Frankly, I don't know that I believe that TM said that. I think that is more than likely GZ thinking he needed to really justify his self defense, and saying 'oh yeah, and he said I was going to die'.

I don't think it really matters. The evidence that exists seems to me to be in agreement with the important elements of GZ story - TM was beating him and he was afraid and couldn't get away and so GZ shot him.

 

[bookworm]

Did Martin call 911?

I hear a lot about threatening behavior on Z's part, but isn't he the only one who called the police?

Exactly. He had a cell phone in his hand. Sorry, I'm just not buying that continuing his conversation with his girlfriend was more important than getting away from that guy he was so "afraid" of. No way.

 

[eerok]

So, TM is just a kid, and GZ is a unstable goofball. No, no bias there.

TM was a kid. Maybe you'd call him a menacing black male armed with Skittles?

GZ's violent and paranoid history is a matter of record, and arguably only a goofball would get a felony conviction for assault against a police officer and still think he had a shot at a career in law enforcement.

If my description of GZ is unflattering, I can only be faulted for accuracy.

But to answer your question, no, it's not reasonable . It's not reasonable to argue that 'all lapses in judgement are the same, therefor all consequences should be the same.'

Who said all consequences should be the same? I don't think GZ should be shot dead. Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're saying.

Keep in mind that we only have GZ's word that TM did anything wrong at all, but we have clear evidence of what GZ did wrong. He was an idiot trying to be a hero.