Trayvon

[Vandy Vol]

As soon as they showed the blood on the back of Zimmerman's head, I proclaimed self defense. Only a weak beta male would not see it this way.

Self defense laws don't revolve around who has the most injuries, who was the first to incur injuries, or where those injuries are located.  Someone who starts a fight can end up with injuries on the back of his head.

[RWS]

As soon as they showed the blood on the back of Zimmerman's head, I proclaimed self defense. Only a weak beta male would not see it this way.

For me it was more of a snowball effect.  I saw piece after piece of evidence of evidence that backed up Zimmerman's story.  It looked legit at face value, and the pictures certainly supported what he was saying.  His story never changed.  It was very clear and made complete sense.  He didn't plan on killing the kid.  I just can't imagine him calling the police if he planned on death being the outcome.  When he was brought in for questioning, he didn't know that they hadn't found any witnesses.  His story still didn't change.  One of the detectives even testified that they tried to trick him up and told him that they located a witness who had cell phone video of the event.  His reply was "Thank God!", and he seemed relieved.  Then the police nor the DA saw the need to press charges, or even send it to the grand jury.   

Like I said before was Zimmerman overzealous?  Sure.  Did he have a little bit of hero syndrome?  Probably.  But in all of the times he called the police before, there wasn't any instances of him actually confronting the subject (that I'm aware of, anyway).  I don't even think that if he had given Martin a "Hey, what are you doing here?" that it would be unreasonable.  Zimmerman was where he was supposed to be.  He has every right to be suspicious of somebody he doesn't recognize wandering around the neighborhood at night, especially when that person fits the description of people that had been committing burglaries in the neighborhood.

[The Prowler]

For me it was more of a snowball effect.  I saw piece after piece of evidence of evidence that backed up Zimmerman's story.  It looked legit at face value, and the pictures certainly supported what he was saying.  His story never changed.  It was very clear and made complete sense.  He didn't plan on killing the kid.  I just can't imagine him calling the police if he planned on death being the outcome.  When he was brought in for questioning, he didn't know that they hadn't found any witnesses.  His story still didn't change.  One of the detectives even testified that they tried to trick him up and told him that they located a witness who had cell phone video of the event.  His reply was "Thank God!", and he seemed relieved.  Then the police nor the DA saw the need to press charges, or even send it to the grand jury.   

Like I said before was Zimmerman overzealous?  Sure.  Did he have a little bit of hero syndrome?  Probably.  But in all of the times he called the police before, there wasn't any instances of him actually confronting the subject (that I'm aware of, anyway).  I don't even think that if he had given Martin a "Hey, what are you doing here?" that it would be unreasonable.  Zimmerman was where he was supposed to be.  He has every right to be suspicious of somebody he doesn't recognize wandering around the neighborhood at night, especially when that person fits the description of people that had been committing burglaries in the neighborhood.

[The Prowler]

For me it was more of a snowball effect.  I saw piece after piece of evidence of evidence that backed up Zimmerman's story.  It looked legit at face value, and the pictures certainly supported what he was saying.  His story never changed.  It was very clear and made complete sense.  He didn't plan on killing the kid.  I just can't imagine him calling the police if he planned on death being the outcome.  When he was brought in for questioning, he didn't know that they hadn't found any witnesses.  His story still didn't change.  One of the detectives even testified that they tried to trick him up and told him that they located a witness who had cell phone video of the event.  His reply was "Thank God!", and he seemed relieved.  Then the police nor the DA saw the need to press charges, or even send it to the grand jury.   

Like I said before was Zimmerman overzealous?  Sure.  Did he have a little bit of hero syndrome?  Probably.  But in all of the times he called the police before, there wasn't any instances of him actually confronting the subject (that I'm aware of, anyway).  I don't even think that if he had given Martin a "Hey, what are you doing here?" that it would be unreasonable.  Zimmerman was where he was supposed to be.  He has every right to be suspicious of somebody he doesn't recognize wandering around the neighborhood at night, especially when that person fits the description of people that had been committing burglaries in the neighborhood.

What I don't understand, why the fuck did/does the media continue to say that Zimmerman chased after him even when he was told not to (or in some mediot's case chasing after him with a gun, making it sound like Zimmerman was waving the gun around)? He was FOLLOWING Martin to try and tell the Police dispatch where he was going. Then when the dispatcher asked him if he was following him, he said yes (out of breath), then the dispatch told him to stop, he stopped (slowly regaining his breath and began telling the dispatch of his location)...Btw, that lasted a total of about 20 seconds. Also, Zimmerman said "it's fucking cold" (not "it's a fucking "coon" like the dumbass, racist, pieces of shit are trying to say that Zimmerman said). I'm starting to get very sick of this entire Country and if things continue to go like they're going, it's going to get a whole lot worse, which will be right around the time I move...probably to Canada or overseas somewhere. It was stated before, iirc someone here stated it, that this will probably be one of the shortest lived Dynastys in History.

[GH2001]

For me it was more of a snowball effect.  I saw piece after piece of evidence of evidence that backed up Zimmerman's story.  It looked legit at face value, and the pictures certainly supported what he was saying.  His story never changed.  It was very clear and made complete sense.  He didn't plan on killing the kid.  I just can't imagine him calling the police if he planned on death being the outcome.  When he was brought in for questioning, he didn't know that they hadn't found any witnesses.  His story still didn't change.  One of the detectives even testified that they tried to trick him up and told him that they located a witness who had cell phone video of the event.  His reply was "Thank God!", and he seemed relieved.  Then the police nor the DA saw the need to press charges, or even send it to the grand jury.   

Like I said before was Zimmerman overzealous?  Sure.  Did he have a little bit of hero syndrome?  Probably.  But in all of the times he called the police before, there wasn't any instances of him actually confronting the subject (that I'm aware of, anyway).  I don't even think that if he had given Martin a "Hey, what are you doing here?" that it would be unreasonable.  Zimmerman was where he was supposed to be.  He has every right to be suspicious of somebody he doesn't recognize wandering around the neighborhood at night, especially when that person fits the description of people that had been committing burglaries in the neighborhood.

I thought it. And you typed it. Agree 100%.

Did the same thing with Casey Anthony. As evidence piled up it started looking more and more one sided in both of these cases. Problem with the latter was overcharging.

[CCTAU]

Self defense laws don't revolve around who has the most injuries, who was the first to incur injuries, or where those injuries are located.  Someone who starts a fight can end up with injuries on the back of his head.

A man with a gun does not voluntarily allow an attacker to get close enough to bash his head in. THAT IS WHY THEY CARRY A GUN! That is why common sense should have prevailed.


But the media played on the new beta male touchy feely sense of justice and created a racial issue where there was none.

So it was clear form a common sense standpoint that GZ was attacked. When attacked a man will do what it takes to survive.

But because GZ looked white and TM was black, it was a hate killing......according the the media who only wants to keep ratings up.

[AUChizad]

BUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE RACES WERE REVERSED???

Answer:
http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/

Updated 12/18/2009 10:41 PM
Jury Finds Roderick Scott Not Guilty

By: Mike Hedeen

Not guilty: The verdict in the manslaughter trial of Roderick Scott. After more than 19 hours of deliberations over two days, a jury acquitted the Greece man in the shooting death of Christopher Cervini, 17, last April.

"I just want to say thank you to the people who believed in me, who stood by me,” Scott said following the verdict. “I still have my regrets for the Cervini family; it's still an unfortunate situation for them. I am happy that at least this chapter is over."

As deliberations dragged on over two days and the jury asked for testimony to be read back, Scott admits he didn't know how it would all turn out.

"I was nervous of course,” he said. “You never know what direction this whole thing is going to turn, so I have no idea. But it worked out and I feel that justice (was) served today."

Cervini's family members say justice wasn't served. They say Christopher was murdered in cold blood, that he'd never been in trouble and Scott acted as judge, jury and executioner.

"The message is that we can all go out and get guns and feel anybody that we feel is threatening us and lie about the fact,” said Jim Cervini, Christopher’s father. “My son never threatened anybody. He was a gentle child, his nature was gentle, he was a good person and he was never, ever arrested for anything, and has never been in trouble. He was 16 years and four months old, and he was slaughtered."

Scott says he acted in self defense when he confronted Cervini and two others saying they were stealing from neighbors cars. He told them he had a gun and ordered them to freeze and wait for police.

Scott says he shot Cervini twice when the victim charged toward him yelling he was going to get Scott.

"How can this happen to a beautiful, sweet child like that?” asked Cervini’s aunt Carol Cervini. “All he wanted to do was go home. And then for them to say, he was saying, 'Please don't kill me. I'm just a kid,' and he just kept on shooting him."

Scott says the last seven months have been difficult for him and his family. If he could go back to the events in the early morning hours of April 4, there are things he says he would do differently.

"If it meant a person not losing their life, absolutely,” he said. “Would I still have tried to stop what was going on? That I would have done. But if I knew ahead of time that I could do something to help somebody from losing their life, I don't want anyone to lose their life."

Scott says the first thing he was going to do was go home and get a good night sleep. When asked if he'll continue living in his current home, which is just one street away from the Cervini's, he said “for the time being.”

[dallaswareagle]

BUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE RACES WERE REVERSED???

Answer:
http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/

I would organize a protest get everybody all worked, but I have a regular job as most normal folks do and don't have the time.

[Snaggletiger]

I need a 52" Sony for my back porch.  Anyone interested in organizing a protest outside the Northside Dothan Wall Marks tonight around, ooohh...saayy 8:30?

[Townhallsavoy]

I need a 52" Sony for my back porch.  Anyone interested in organizing a protest outside the Northside Dothan Wall Marks tonight around, ooohh...saayy 8:30?

I say we assemble in Tuscaloosa decked out in Bama gear and protest outside T-Town Menswear.

[dallaswareagle]

I say we assemble in Tuscaloosa decked out in Bama gear and protest outside T-Town Menswear.

I'd join but I don't want to have to knock my teeth out, gain 50lbs, marry my sister and have a DVD of me fucking my mother/Aunt to blend in.

[ssgaufan]

I'd join but I don't want to have to knock my teeth out, gain 50lbs, marry my sister and have a DVD of me fucking my mother/Aunt to blend in.

 

[Vandy Vol]

A man with a gun does not voluntarily allow an attacker to get close enough to bash his head in. THAT IS WHY THEY CARRY A GUN! That is why common sense should have prevailed.


But the media played on the new beta male touchy feely sense of justice and created a racial issue where there was none.

So it was clear form a common sense standpoint that GZ was attacked. When attacked a man will do what it takes to survive.

But because GZ looked white and TM was black, it was a hate killing......according the the media who only wants to keep ratings up.

I don't see what any of this has to do with prematurely assuming what happened.

You look at a picture of cuts on the back of someone's head and declare self defense?  Premature assumption.

You wait until all the evidence has come out, or at least enough has come out to determine that self defense occurred?  Not premature assumption.

All I was pointing out is that those "touchy feely beta males" who jumped to the conclusion that it was NOT self defense can not be blamed or berated any more than those who jumped to the conclusion that it WAS self defense.

[GH2001]

I don't see what any of this has to do with prematurely assuming what happened.

You look at a picture of cuts on the back of someone's head and declare self defense?  Premature assumption.

You wait until all the evidence has come out, or at least enough has come out to determine that self defense occurred?  Not premature assumption.

All I was pointing out is that those "touchy feely beta males" who jumped to the conclusion that it was NOT self defense can not be blamed or berated any more than those who jumped to the conclusion that it WAS self defense.

No but you do notice the injuries are pretty consistent with his story. 

[JR4AU]

I don't see what any of this has to do with prematurely assuming what happened.

You look at a picture of cuts on the back of someone's head and declare self defense?  Premature assumption.

You wait until all the evidence has come out, or at least enough has come out to determine that self defense occurred?  Not premature assumption.

All I was pointing out is that those "touchy feely beta males" who jumped to the conclusion that it was NOT self defense can not be blamed or berated any more than those who jumped to the conclusion that it WAS self defense.

While your posts here have been very good, you know like I do, that the truth, or more accurately, the entire truth doesn't usually come out at trial.  Trials are not really a truth finding endeavor.  Fact is, only 2 people know the truth, then entire truth, about what happened, and one is dead.  Moreover, "the truth" to Zimmerman, may have been completely different than "the truth" to Trayvon, as both were subject to their own emotions and perception at the time, as well as their own psychological make up.

The ones that wanted Zimmerman convicted from the start, really wanted him convicted because a young black male died because Zimmerman did something, when he had a choice to do nothing.  Many feel he was guilty from the moment he took it upon himself to investigate Trayvon, instead of just letting him walk on his way. 

The ones that wanted him acquitted, wanted him acquitted because he "did the right thing".  The type thing we all wish we had guys in our own neighborhood doing, and that has risks, but he was "doing the right thing" in their minds.  They really feel that anything he did with "good intentions" should be given a pass.     

Of course, underlying each side's opinions are agendas.  Multiple agendas.  Court of public opinion is just that, and is not fact. 

The facts that could be proved in a court of law under the rules of evidence, proved to a jury that Zimmerman acted in self defense, or failed to prove he intentionally and unlawfully killed Trayvon.  "The Truth" about it all is lost like a fart in the wind. 

[Vandy Vol]

No but you do notice the injuries are pretty consistent with his story.

Yes, but his story ≠ fact, necessarily.  There are pieces of evidence to consider other than the defendant's testimony and the existence of injuries.  Like I said, injuries can occur to the aggressor in a fight, so those injuries alone don't substantiate anything.

Don't get me wrong...if the only evidence in the case was his testimony and his injuries, he would be found not guilty due to an inability to prove criminal conduct beyond a reasonable doubt.  However, any rational person realizes that there is going to be more evidence than just the defendant's testimony and pictures of injuries, so it's absolutely unreasonable to jump to ANY conclusion before viewing that evidence.  Irrational people act as if they automatically know the truth as soon as they hear the media report a handful of "facts," and those irrational people exist on both sides of the fence.

[Vandy Vol]

While your posts here have been very good, you know like I do, that the truth, or more accurately, the entire truth doesn't usually come out at trial.  Trials are not really a truth finding endeavor.  Fact is, only 2 people know the truth, then entire truth, about what happened, and one is dead.  Moreover, "the truth" to Zimmerman, may have been completely different than "the truth" to Trayvon, as both were subject to their own emotions and perception at the time, as well as their own psychological make up.

The ones that wanted Zimmerman convicted from the start, really wanted him convicted because a young black male died because Zimmerman did something, when he had a choice to do nothing.  Many feel he was guilty from the moment he took it upon himself to investigate Trayvon, instead of just letting him walk on his way. 

The ones that wanted him acquitted, wanted him acquitted because he "did the right thing".  The type thing we all wish we had guys in our own neighborhood doing, and that has risks, but he was "doing the right thing" in their minds.  They really feel that anything he did with "good intentions" should be given a pass.     

Of course, underlying each side's opinions are agendas.  Multiple agendas.  Court of public opinion is just that, and is not fact. 

The facts that could be proved in a court of law under the rules of evidence, proved to a jury that Zimmerman acted in self defense, or failed to prove he intentionally and unlawfully killed Trayvon.  "The Truth" about it all is lost like a fart in the wind.

A trial is a fact finding endeavor (hence juries being referred to as the "triers of fact"), but no, the actual truth is not always discovered; I agree with that.

Maybe I used poor wording in one or more of my posts, but I was not attempting to state that a trial will always find the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  All I was intending to point out was the fact that the trial will unearth much more evidence than what was initially reported in the media, and that a trial will usually attempt to verify those facts with a little more scrutiny than the media often does.  Anyone who jumps to a conclusion based on the media's initial "facts" and without at least hearing the majority of the evidence presented at trial under the rules of evidence is making a premature legal assumption about what they think happened or wanted to happen.

[JR4AU]

A trial is a fact finding endeavor (hence juries being referred to as the "triers of fact"), but no, the actual truth is not always discovered; I agree with that.

Maybe I used poor wording in one or more of my posts, but I was not attempting to state that a trial will always find the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  All I was intending to point out was the fact that the trial will unearth much more evidence than what was initially reported in the media, and that a trial will usually attempt to verify those facts with a little more scrutiny than the media often does.  Anyone who jumps to a conclusion based on the media's initial "facts" and without at least hearing the majority of the evidence presented at trial under the rules of evidence is making a premature legal assumption about what they think happened or wanted to happen.

I was actually agreeing with you, while trying to further explain for others.  Sorry if it sounded like I was disagreeing.

[Vandy Vol]

I was actually agreeing with you, while trying to further explain for others.  Sorry if it sounded like I was disagreeing.

Are you disagreeing with me again?  Look, I already said it once and I'll say it again, this time with fancy hashtags and capitalized letters for emphasis:  #NOJUSTICE  #WHITEPRIVILEGE  #BLACKPANTHERS  #ROLLTIDE

Hopefully that clarified my superior stance, as you obviously disagree when you shouldn't.

[The Prowler]

Hey Vandy & JR...I heard Walmart has a couple 60" TVs let's go Riot in the parking lot and get those TVs?!?!?! WoooHooo!!!! This is for Zimmerman mutha fuckas!!!!!!!!