Zimmy, you have a bright future as an interpreter of sorts. Every statement I make you have an uncanny ability to interpret to your liking. A Kreskin-like gift you either developed or were born with,kudos.

Apparently in a 3 day period in the same week this kid was killed in Florida , in Obama's home city of Chicago there were 23 murders.
Don't think Obama made a comment on one of them nor did Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton.
I'll bet $ all 23 in Chicago were black on black murders !

I bet you are 100% correct Ron!

I'll bet you got that from a retarded e-mail forward thats completely wrong!

:rotf2:

And I'll bet all of these were acts of murder, homicide or manslaughter. From what I've read the actual rate of guns used to kill in self defense is really, really low.

In the Zimmerman situation, you have a guy with multiple arrests for violence, who's carrying when he's not supposed to be, perusing a person he's not supposed to be and placing himself into harms way by engaging with someone he himself has declared suspicious which he also knows he's not supposed to be doing. The police would have known all this when he was in custody.

The lead investigator doesn't believe his story and wants him held and charged with manslaughter.

Because he claims self defense the burden is now on the police to find enough evidence he's lying, which the State says they don't have, so he walks a few hours later after killing a teenager with a bag of Skittles.

Something really isn't right here.

-spence

What was your reason for posting the information for then? Maybe if you elaborated, others wouldn't have to extrapolate meaning. Did you post that to point out what a terribly crappy day he had that started with suspension for pot and ended in the morgue? I guess I am not Kreskin, heck I can't remember responding to your other posts. I will refrain from now on :)

Oh, is it the act, the arrest, or the conviction that makes someone a criminal? The lack of arrest precludes him from being a criminal? If so, then so does the lack of conviction. I guess the black panthers you referenced aren't criminals then, either. What were you talking about then?

Spence, the facts of the cases are irrelevant. Haven't you learned anything here? It doesn't matter that the lead investigator recommended arrest in this case. The faulty use of a self defense laws is irrelevant. You are so nuts, you probably think that a jury should decide the merits of the case, rather than have a police department overrule the lead investigator. Crazy anti-constitution liberal.

Zimmerman has stood trial for assaulting a police officer.

I still don't know why the media insist on showing only pictures of Trayvon as an 11 year old.

I'm not sure there are that many to choose from. A quick Google image search only shows the younger photo, the hoodie photo and a few random ones with his dad.

-spence

I don't think Zimmerman is a monster, most likely he just really, really, really, really 'effed up.

What does surprise me though is how the State responded to the event. While Zimmerman has rights to be respected, it seems like they really rushed him out the door and back on the street.

Why?

-spence

You don't know what "the act" was or how it happened. He has not been arrested or convicted. I'm pretty sure then he should not be called a criminal.
I never said anything about the black panthers.

Spence, here is WHY

look at the EVIDENCE immediatly after the incident. Witnesses account that they saw MARTIN holding down Zimmerman. Police officer at the scene noted that zimmerman had wounds to his nose and back of his head.
there you go, thats enough evidence that Zimmerman acted in self defence.
Its not a cut and dry case as some are making it out to be.

The chain of responses is above. As I said, I didn't know what you were referring to when you said "so you know this as fact." It was an ambiguous statement. Someone else brought up who the "real criminals are" right before your post. I don't know if he is a criminal. I didn't bring that up. I do know that the lead investigator recommended arrest. It should go through the courts. That is the crux of the problem. Let the judicial system decide the case. Trayvon had him pinned to the ground? So what? What about his right to defend himself? He was followed at night by a guy twice his size. It should go to the courts. Who made the decision not to arrest him?? That isn't even clear. I support right to defend, but the burden falls on the defender to show force was necessary. Otherwise, we have a lawless society.

interpreter

The courts will sort it out,Florida has unique gun laws.

They're 'stand your ground' not 'follow black kids around'.

Of what is this an interpretation? The courts don't get to sort it out without an arrest.

Interesting thing is that one witness says that he couldn't see the details because it was dark. Police grilled him, and according the the witnesses mother, pressured him into choosing a sweatshirt color by multiple choice. Other witnesses say they heard what sounded like a child cry out right before the shot. Add to that the video footage that shows no evidence of injury to Zimmerman and it is pretty clear the courts should decide.

I know Ted.
He does have the right to defend himself with deadly force though.
Brockton could use a vigilante,keeps the animals in line.
Kids will think twice before packing skittles now.

Then I will refer to it as the "legal system".
Give it a chance to work before assuming judge and jury responsibilities.

that was yesterdays news..

Enhanced surveillance images of George Zimmerman, the man who admitted shooting the teen but claimed self-defense, appear to show a bump, mark or injury on the back of his head.

exactly

Zimmy, watch where you get your information...

Trayvon Martin case: George Zimmerman video shows gashes on back of shooter's head | Mail Online

This is some recent enhanced footage which shows bruising to the back of his head...I am not vouching for the authenticity.

The media gets an "F" for reporting this. Have you heard what "The Today Show" did?

‘He Looks Black’: NBC Launching Investigation into Selective Editing of Zimmerman Police Tape | Video | TheBlaze.com

According to NBC, in talking to the dispatcher, Zimmerman said this...

"This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”

NBC clearly wanted its audience to think that Zimmerman equates black with "up to no good". However, in the unedited version of that call, after Zimmerman said the kid looked like he was up to no good, the dispatcher ASKED Zimmerman what color the kid was. All Zimmerman did was answer the question that was asked. Who broke this story? The liars at Foxnews...

It's incredible to me that NBC has any credibility. The folks who spliced that audio put Zimmerman's life in danger for the purposes of sensationalizing the footage, and - shockingly - they edited the footage to make it appear in the most racist possible light.

If NBC had any credibility whatsoever, it has none now. Zip. They put this guy's life in danger.

At least we agree on that, just have a different interpretation of what that means. Police are not judge and jury.

no, but the police gather the evidence and do the investigation. we have ZERO output from their investigation. All we know if they havent arrested Zimmerman. Thats it.

Zimmerman referred to Martin as a spook on the call.

The partial report was released by the police. Doesn't provide much information. We know that Trayvon didn't have a gun or knife or any weapon. We know that the law as written in Florida says that the force must be necessary to "prevent imminent death or great bodily harm." The phone conversations show that Trayvon was followed. Zimmerman admits that he is following him. Combine those details with burden the law places on the person who kills and with the lead investigators concerns about the legitimacy of Zimmerman's story. I make no judgement about whether he should be convicted, but it is crystal clear that his parents are completely justified to call bs on the whole system that let the guy walk. If one of my kids or someone I love is walking around Florida unarmed, gets followed, and ends up shot, the shooter had better darn well have to prove it was necessary to "prevent imminent death or great bodily harm."

Why is this case considered "political"?

Nobody is saying it's cut and dry, the argument is that in fact it was obfuscated enough to merit more diligence.

Even if Martin had gained the upper hand in the struggle the police would have known that Zimmerman should have been in his car waiting for the police.

And even then, if I engage you in a fight and I'm losing (which isn't likely :hihi:) should I have the right to shoot you dead when you're unarmed?

The burden should have been on the investigation to show this clearly wasn't a manslaughter case...

-spence

Spence, the man is presumed innocent, and the burden of proof is always, always, on the state to prove otherwise. The accused never has to prove his innocence, the system was intentionally not set up as you would have it work...

That's a key question. However, we still don't know for sure that Zimmerman engaged this kid (although that's what I would assume). As I said earlier, it seems to me that liberal types and racial hucksters learned absolutely nothing from the Duke lacrosse case, and the nightmare you put those kids through. You're doing the same exact thing.

Presumption of innocence has a bearing on the final outcome, not necessarily the charge...You could be charged with manslaughter, you're still presumed innocent until found guilty.

I would think that had he told an accurate story to the police they would have known he was on the neighborhood watch and set out on foot to presume someone he had identified as suspicious. This was later confirmed by the 911 recording. This alone should have given the police pause and it would seem as though the lead investigator wasn't convinced his story was consistent.

This is the nut of the whole case, why the State would rush to release someone under such circumstances. Some clearly think it was racism...

-spence

this little tidbit aint getting a lot of attention from the media...

“You will recall the incident of the beating of the black homeless man Sherman Ware on December 4, 2010 by the son of a Sanford police officer. The beating sparked outrage in the community but there were very few that stepped up to do anything about it. I would presume the inaction was because of the fact that he was homeless not because he was black. Do you know the individual who stepped up when no one else in the black community would? Do you know who spent tireless hours putting flyers on the cars of persons parked in the churches of the black community? Do you know who waited for the church-goers to get out of church so that he could hand them flyers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8, 2011 at Sanford City Hall?? That person was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN.” – from a letter to Turner Clayton of the Seminole County NAACP written by “a concerned Zimmerman family member”

You need to look at the video when blownup by a tv station that is unbiased and it clearly shows two scraping type wounds to the back of Zimmerman's head. Which by the way had been attended to and cleaned up by paramedics at the scene. I would want you on any jury that I had anything to do with.

Spence, you said the burden should have been to prove that he didn't commit a crime. That's not the way he works. The presumption of innocence does not begin at trial, it exists all along.

"why the State would rush to release someone under such circumstances."

Someone who knows a bit more than you thought it was premature to arrest. Let's see how it plays out.

"Some clearly think it was racism..."

Yes. Some of the same folks who cried racism in the first days of the Duke lacrosse case. How did that work out for the race-baiters?? Not so well, as I recall.

We need to stop crying "racism" every single time something like this happens, before we know what happened. It may have been racially motivated. Let's see before we pin that label on the guy. Is that unreasonable?

Yeah, I've seen it. He certainly doesn't look like he was in imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to justify shooting an unarmed person. Good point, both videos do seem to indicate the use of dealy force may not have been necessary. Why would the guy with the gun need to scream for help if he could shoot the kid anyway? Instead of help me, maybe get off me or I will shoot you?

The race part is irrelevant in my opinion and both sides are ignoring what is the bigger point. Unarmed kid followed by unprovoked armed adult and shot. No evidence of threat to life of shooter, beyond a few scrapes. Shooter never warned dead kid "get off or I will kill you." Screams on 911 call at time of shot shown not to be shooter. Give me a break. This shouldn't be about race or politics. It should be about the circumstances and whether it should go into the judiciary.

you keep posting one sided, un proven, evidence

In RI had the same situation occurred the shooter would have probably been detained and charged with at least manslaughter. They would still be presumed innocent mind you.

-spence

Twio key words that make your point moot Spence. You said "if" and "probably".

The 911 phone call lasted for a substantial amount of time.. Did you listen to it? Also, I have seen the high detail video. It seems, to use one of your buddies on here favorite terms , common sense, that imminent threat of death or severe bodily harm would have caused a bit more damage. You right it is unproven but he did shoot and kill someone, who was unarmed. If Martin had busted into Zimmerman's house or gone after Zimmerman with a weapon without the provocation of chasing after him in the dark, it isn't even a story. It is the details that make it a story. I post what is reported about the night, you post a mostly irrelevant letter from a family member; irrelevant from a legal standpoint since the question isn't whether he killed him because of his race, but if he killed him because his own life was imminently threatened.

The great part about gun laws in Florida is that you DO NOT have to say "get off or I will kill you". You simply squeeze the trigger and deal with the consequences.