May 25, 2013

"There's been a spate of new pleadings in the George Zimmerman case."

TalkLeft explains it better than anyone else, as far as I know.

ALSO: "Slain Florida teen Trayvon Martin's cellphone texts and photos show him chatting with friends about marijuana, fighting and guns, new potential evidence shows."

181 comments:

virgil xenophon said...

"What we have here" is the State's attempt at the PC railroad job of of all railroad jobs--the "mother of all railroad jobs" as it were. Nothing less and nothing more..

Saint Croix said...

Heh, the Althouse blog covered this story two days ago.

Jim said...

I got banned from commenting at the Atlantic because I called Saint Trayvon a "thug." I claim vindication for my position.

ironrailsironweights said...

I fervently hope that this case goes away, exactly how doesn't matter, because if there's a trial we will be absolutely bombarded with the Blogosphere's Quasi-Homoerotic Black Male Physical Superiority Fetish. We will hear incessant blather about black men's superior strength, athleticism, and street fighting ability. Prepare to be nauseated.

Peter

edutcher said...

Let's hear from all the trolls who were ready to lynch Zimmerman.

The farther down we go, the more justified he was.

Looks like "Trayvon" really was Son of Choom.

pst314 said...

Obama said "If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon."

Saint Croix said...

"My blog is so big I don't even know what's in it!"

CEO-MMP said...

His mother had kicked him out of her house. He had to take a bus to get to his father. He was taking pictures of growing pot plants (notice I didn't say he was growing them, I don't believe we know that for sure).

It's not just GZ's trial, but what about all the money the homeowners association paid Tracy, Sybrina and fucking Crumptydumpty?

CEO-MMP said...

Yes St Croix--you mentioned it the day the material was released.

But I bet I knew about it before you did.

So do I get a cookie too?

:)

AllenS said...

It was a well written article that everyone should be able to understand. The state is all in on this one, and will do whatever they can to convict Zimmerman. To the state, the law be damned.

Saint Croix said...

This blog is too damn big for Althouse to follow. They ought to make a movie, The Blog. And it keeps getting bigger and bigger and it has a mind of its own.

"Oh no! What are you doing? I didn't even know you were there. My blog is out of control!"

AReasonableMan said...

So a teenage boy has an interest in marijuana, guns and fighting. I am shocked. Shocked to find out about this.

Next thing you know he will express an interest in sex.

Saint Croix said...

Why do people keep asking me for cookies? You're like the second guy who asked me for cookies. I have no cookies! When did I get this cookie reputation?

rhhardin said...

The prosecutor lady and the IRS lady are the same person, I think.

They take secret orders from Nancy Grace.

Saint Croix said...

Now I feel sorry for Hillary.

Make your own damn cookies!

Mitchell the Bat said...

I'm reserving my opinion until we hear from the faculty at Duke.

Oso Negro said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Big Mike said...

So a teenage boy has an interest in marijuana, guns and fighting. I am shocked. Shocked to find out about this.

But if he's interested in starting fights, and Zimmerman's defense claims he was attacked and knocked down and defenseless except for his handgun, then the state has no case.

Oso Negro said...

Saint Trayvon was just another aspiring street nigger. Zimmerman was an overeager neighborhood watch type who defended himself. The usual suspects have to be offended, the powers that be insisted on making a show. What the country really needs right now is a good old-fashioned race riot when Zimmerman is acquitted. It will give Obama something to act presidential about.

CEO-MMP said...

Saint Croix said...

Why do people keep asking me for cookies? You're like the second guy who asked me for cookies. I have no cookies! When did I get this cookie reputation?"

Well Ritmo said you had the cookies.

You're saying you don't have the cookies? You never heard of the cookies? Those are absolutely not your cookies? And even if they were, you never swallowed?

Wait...that came out wrong.

virgil xenophon said...

The wisdom of Mitchel the Bat wins the thread!

CEO-MMP said...

The wisdom of Mitchel the Bat wins the thread!"


I'm not saying Mitchell isn't wise, but come on--that Duke thing has been overdone.

Richard Dolan said...

The arguments about whether any of these materials detailing Travyon Martin's past and proclivities are the routine, albeit important, kinds of issues in any case like this. What's not routine is the defense claim that the State produced electronic discovery in a format that was unreadable unless the defense had access to special and expensive software, coupled with what sounds like frivolous motions for gag orders.

The criminal justice system has a lot of problems, but this prosecution seems particularly troubled. Just as hard cases make bad law, high profile, politicized cases bring out the worst in a flawed system, making the law itself look bad.

Drago said...

ARM: "So a teenage boy has an interest in marijuana, guns and fighting. I am shocked. Shocked to find out about this."

So this is the lefts new fall back position.

That all those darn teenagers are running around like gangbangers so Trayvon is hardly out of the ordinary and certainly didn't deserve to die at the hands of a white Hispanic just because he (Trayvon) jumped on GZ, drove him to the ground and started pummeling him (like its a MMA cage match).

Oh, and now that the FACT that eyewitness testimony within an hour of the incident asserts that Trayvon precisely that I suppose we can move to the "end game" scenario (a al Duke Lacrosse) where there's really nothing left to see here anymore and certainly there are no lessons to be drawn about how the left jumps the gun to convict (in the court of public opinion) anyone who violates "PC Law".

Richard Dolan said...

The arguments about whether any of these materials detailing Travyon Martin's past and proclivities are the routine, albeit important, kinds of issues in any case like this. What's not routine is the defense claim that the State produced electronic discovery in a format that was unreadable unless the defense had access to special and expensive software, coupled with what sounds like frivolous motions for gag orders.

The criminal justice system has a lot of problems, but this prosecution seems particularly troubled. Just as hard cases make bad law, high profile, politicized cases bring out the worst in a flawed system, making the law itself look bad.

edutcher said...

AnUnreasonableTroll said...

So a teenage boy has an interest in marijuana, guns and fighting. I am shocked. Shocked to find out about this..

Next thing you know he will express an interest in sex.


So when the "teenage boy", looking for a little choom money, jumps Troll and starts beating him to a pulp; while he screams for help, he won't be "shocked" if we all stand there and remind him the "teenage boy" is just indulging his "interests" and that we hope Troll brought along his cast-iron long drawers in case the "teenage boy" decides to indulge his "interest" in sex.

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AllenS said...

Wow, ARM really doesn't have a clue. The whole Reasonable schtick is a joke. Right?

jr565 said...

Remember when Geraldo got in trouble for suggesting that wearing a hoodie might give people a negative impression of you as a thug. (And by that I think he meant blacks and Latinos who's gang culture uses hoodies as gang identification, rather than white preppies). He got into a lot of trouble for saying that.
but you know what also give the impression of thuggish ness? Identifying yourself as a thug.

I think Zimmerman looked at him as trouble because that's what Trayvon was. A self identified thug wanna be.
Who was wandering around in a gated community afer hours looking like a thug.

Now, just because that is so doesnt mea that you ARE a thug. May kids of today dress like thugs but are I. Fact not thugs. (Which again is what Geraldo was warning against). But in Trayvons case, the dress seems to match the behavior.

No wonder his mother kicked him out of the house. No wonder he was suspended from school three times(for among other things having a bag full of women's jewelry and a burglary tool)

Saint Croix said...

Ritmo said you had the cookies.

Thank God, I was afraid it was a vast left-wing conspiracy.

Bruce Hayden said...

So a teenage boy has an interest in marijuana, guns and fighting. I am shocked. Shocked to find out about this.

I think that it goes a bit beyond that, but thanks for trying. I think that the better take is that: Saint Trayvon was just another aspiring street nigger.

Still, evidence of bad character is often not admissible. A couple problems here though. One is that the prosecution is supposed to be planning, or maybe planning, on trying to bring into evidence a decade or so old assault charge against Zimmerman (or something like that). And, this is a shot across their bow - if they go for impugning Zimmerman's character through showing a decade old incidence of violent behavior, the defense is prepared, and believes themselves entitled, to bring into evidence very recent evidence of bad and violent behavior by Martin. While Zimmerman may have been somewhat violent in his early 20s, when males are at their most violent, he was well beyond that now, whereas Martin had been rapidly approaching that point in his life.

Another aspect of this is that there is still the question of who said what in the recorded calls. The only chance that the prosecution probably has would be if it could be to convince the jury that some of the victim's voice was more likely Martin's, since that would reduce the probability that this was truly a righteous self-defense shooting.

Third, the prosecution is clearly very political. The self-defense evidence is strong enough that a DA would be unlikely to waste his resources on this sort of case in the normal course of business. They are all-in though, and have to either have a win, or appear to have done everything imaginable to get such.

Which gets to my last point, and that is that the prosecution is pushing the bounds of litigation ethics and rules. They have apparently routinely failed to provide exonerating evidence for Zimmerman or incriminating evidence against Martin to the Defense, and have apparently been playing games with timely identifying expert witnesses and their testimony. Bad in civil litigation, and I think close to unethical in a 2nd degree murder prosecution. Defense is helpfully pointing this out to the judge for several reasons. One is to get the evidence, and the second is to make the prosecution look bad to the judge (which is why they are making a big deal about the gag order).

SteveR said...

That little boy in the pictures?

ironrailsironweights said...

That all those darn teenagers are running around like gangbangers so Trayvon is hardly out of the ordinary and certainly didn't deserve to die at the hands of a white Hispanic just because he (Trayvon) jumped on GZ, drove him to the ground and started pummeling him (like its a MMA cage match).

Zimmerman may not be guilty of murder, but he still deserves our contempt for being too much of a p***y to fight back, instead letting a scrawny teenager deliver a severe beating. If Zimmerman were, say, 75 years old, or physically disabled, or much smaller than Martin,* or for that matter if he were a she, his inability to defend himself would be understandable. But none of that was the case. So to hell with him.

* = he actually outweighed Martin by at least 50 pounds

Peter

Michael said...

ARM. It is reasonable to produce a picture of who he was at the time of his death in opposition to the picture the press presented over and over, that of an innocent twelve year old.

Michael said...

ARM. It is reasonable to produce a picture of who he was at the time of his death in opposition to the picture the press presented over and over, that of an innocent twelve year old.

Bruce Hayden said...

What's not routine is the defense claim that the State produced electronic discovery in a format that was unreadable unless the defense had access to special and expensive software, coupled with what sounds like frivolous motions for gag orders.

So far, it looks like the gag order stuff is more just something to make the defense look bad, with little if any real substance behind such a claim. But, the cell phone stuff is much more interesting, at least so far. Apparently, the state has sophisticated software that can be used to dump the contents of a cell phone. Surprise, surprise. The problem is that it is expensive (your taxpayer's dollars at work). Also, there is some evidence that the prosecution is selectively providing contents of Martin's phone to the defense, despite having all of it, thanks to that software. They are seemingly asking the judge and the defense to trust that they are providing the defense with everything exculpatory towards Zimmerman or incriminating of Martin. But, given how political the prosecution is, how credible are their assertions to this effect? Much better to just give the defense everything, esp. since this is 2nd degree murder, and not jay walking.

AllenS said...

Peter, I don't think the size/weight difference is as great as what was originally reported.

Bruce Hayden said...

* = he actually outweighed Martin by at least 50 pounds

That is not clear. Sure, a year before that was probably the case, but Martin had bulked up a lot, apparently to 170 or 180, and Zimmerman had slimmed down to almost that. Or, at least there is some evidence of that. And, Martin was a lot tougher and probably stronger at that point, having played sports in high school, etc., while Zimmerman was a decade or so beyond his peak. Of course, both weights at the time of the shooting are in the hands of the police and counsel, so this argument is really moot.

Interesting to me though is that Zimmerman has apparently ballooned up by maybe 100 pounds since then. Not sure why. Could be stress and exercise related, or could be a strategy by the defense. After all, it would be hard for someone of his size today to catch someone with Martin's build. Martin was apparently taller, in better shape, and had played sports where running was important. Did Martin attack Zimmerman, or Zimmerman attack Martin? Hard to believe the latter, if Zimmerman couldn't catch Martin. That sort of logic maybe.

wyo sis said...

Image is everything and the defense should absolutely be able to try to refute the image the media built up around this case.
I'd like to see it disappear from the news entirely until it's over, but that's never going to happen.

AReasonableMan said...

ironrailsironweights said...
Zimmerman may not be guilty of murder, but he still deserves our contempt for being too much of a p***y to fight


He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic. He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that.

Saint Croix said...

The Hosta hotel thread (now on second page) is a great café thread, with discussions of Peggy Noonan, Trayvon, a takedown of Roots, and celebrity plastic surgery disasters. Okay, I did most of those, so I'm just complimenting myself now. But those are great topics! Each and every one of those should have its own frickin' thread.

Althouse: "Start your own damn blog!"

Hey, I did, it was abortion 24/7.

It's way more fun commenting on your blog. Celebrity plastic surgery disasters! That's a great topic.

I should be running Oprah or something. I would so get fired. "Hey, let's do a segment on dead babies."

Saint Croix said...

You're saying you don't have the cookies? You never heard of the cookies? Those are absolutely not your cookies? And even if they were, you never swallowed?

Wait...that came out wrong.


No worries, I will never be cookiephobic.

Unless Titus changes his sign-off phrase or something. "Ummmm, cookies." That might do it.

jr565 said...

According to the autopsy:
The autopsy report says he was 5 feet 11 inches and 158 pounds.[35]” In any case, Trayvon Martin was taller than George Zimmerman, whom the same source reports as “5’8″ and his weight as 185 pounds…”


So Trayvon was taller, and Zimmerman was 25 pounds heavier. And for all intents and purposes it looks like Trayvon was lanky, but muscular, whereas Zimmerman was fat. So, I don't see how the weight should be a factor.

Trayvon was involved in something like a fight club, where he had at least three fights, two of which he won. So he is known to be a fighter.


As an example of the stupidity of the "George Zimmerman was a pussy because he weighed more argument let me ask this:

How tall was Bruce Lee and how much did he weigh?
Bruce Lee was only 5‘7” tall and at his heaviest weighed 165, but his normal weight was between 135 and 145.

I'm taller and weigh more than Bruce Lee, yet the idea that he wouldn't kick my ass in a fight is ludicrous.

So, its not how big you are or how much you weigh, ALONE, that determines who would win against who.

Bruce Hayden said...

ARM: "So a teenage boy has an interest in marijuana, guns and fighting. I am shocked. Shocked to find out about this."

So this is the lefts new fall back position.


The problem here is that it isn't true for many late male adolescents, or, at least not at the level that appears to have been true for Martin. Sure, that may be the norm for the ghetto, but that is not the mainstream. ARM seems to be trying to define deviancy down to the level that it would include Martin.

The problem is that there is some evidence that Martin was a budding gansta criminal. Not the pot smoking, per se, but rather, the posturing, the gold grill, the talk about fights, fighting, knocking people down, stealing, etc. He was seemingly trying to build a rep as a "bad nigger".

This is evidence, I think, that it was much more likely that Martin attacked Zimmerman, than the other way around. What is not clear though is whether Martin did it because he felt disrespected, because it just looked fun, or because it would help make his reputation. Probably will never know.

ARM seems to think that the fact that a lot of late adolescents are thinking about this sort of thing (and some of the more violent are acting them out) is justification for Martin physically attacking Zimmerman. It isn't. Those young males need to be properly civilized, and teaching them that this is not acceptable behavior is key there to prevent our culture from ratcheting to the bottom, where the only things that matter are strength and violence. A lot of them don't learn, which is why a lot of them end up either dead or in prison.

exhelodrvr1 said...

ARM,
If you think it was an overreaction by Zimmerman, I suggest you read about the soccer referee in Colorado who died as the result of one punch to the head by a player in the game he was reffing.

ironrailsironweights said...

And, Martin was a lot tougher and probably stronger at that point, having played sports in high school, etc., while Zimmerman was a decade or so beyond his peak.

Martin was not an athlete, despite what some blogospherians claim. He had briefly played in a children's football league but had last participated at age 13. He never played any high school sports.

Peter

William said...

I think Zimmerman was so ineffective in fighting back because he, Zimmerman, was reaching for his gun instead of pushing Martin off......Martin was definitely a suspicious looking character. Martin, I think, made a conscious effort to look dangerous and, in fact, he had a past history of acting dangerously. Zimmerman's eyeballing was based on something other than crude racism.

jr565 said...

AReasonableMan wrote:
He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic. He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that.

an "unarmed" teenager, who was pounding his face into the pavement, was standing over him MMA style pummeling him in his face (and had the bloody knuckles to prove it) and who had also broken his nose and knocked him flat on his ass.
That doesn't really strike me as being "unarmed". Fists are weapons if you are using them to break someone face.

Please stop with the faux narrative of the angelic choirboy STALKED be Zimmerman, who looked like a smiling preteen who couldn't hurt a fly.
Because only if you cling to that narrative is what Zimmerman did not self defense. Problem for you is, that narrative is full of shit.

Bruce Hayden said...

He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic. He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that.

Of course, this isn't a manslaughter case, but rather 2nd Degree Murder. But, let's examine your theory a bit more. Would a 90 year old grandmother have been justified in shooting Martin if he were attacking her? A 40 year old woman, maybe with her kids? A 5'5" 120 lb guy? A 90 year old male? Me (Martin's height, and was his weight 45 years ago when I was his age, but now a bit heavier and much worse shape now)? If you think that any of those wouldn't be justified in shooting Martin, how about if he had been beating their heads against the concrete walk at the time?

Terry said...

'Evidence' isn't photos, tweets, or testimony, it's what is admitted as 'evidence'. Control the evidence -- the input -- and you control the output of the trial.

jr565 said...

Iron rails wrote:
Martin was not an athlete, despite what some blogospherians claim. He had briefly played in a children's football league but had last participated at age 13. He never played any high school sports.

but he was a fighter in a fight club of sorts. Does that count? There is you tube video of him refereeing one of these fights, and he brags on his tweets that he was in three fights and won two of them. Maybe it doesn't count as being an athlete, but it does count as someone who engages in fisticuffs. Which is what he was engaged in with Zimmerman.

Bruce Hayden said...

Martin was not an athlete, despite what some blogospherians claim. He had briefly played in a children's football league but had last participated at age 13. He never played any high school sports.


Still, look at the recent photos of him in his wife-beater shirt. He had some muscle on him. No fat though, just lean muscle. And, you still come back to the problem that he was coming into his male peak, while Zimmerman was a decade beyond it. Martin also seemingly had been involved in a lot more violence over the previous year, in comparison to Zimmerman - whether it be the fight club, training for it, or his claims of hitting people, while there is no evidence that Zimmerman had struck anyone during that year, or probably the previous decade.

ironrailsironweights said...

I think Zimmerman was so ineffective in fighting back because he, Zimmerman, was reaching for his gun instead of pushing Martin off

Quite possible. Another distinct possibility is that Zimmerman was afraid to fight back due to Martin's race. There's this general belief in white society* that blacks are tough street fighters - COMPLETELY untrue - and that you are doomed if you try to fight back against them. I suspect that Zimmerman would have defended himself more effectively, and less lethally, against a white or Latin teen of exactly Martin's size, because he wouldn't have been afraid to throw a punch. Again, though, your theory about the gun also makes sense.

As an example of the stupidity of the "George Zimmerman was a pussy because he weighed more argument let me ask this:
How tall was Bruce Lee and how much did he weigh?


Which proves less than nothing. Lee was an extremely accomplished martial artist.

Peter

jr565 said...

Trayvon wanted to be a thug. Yet, truth be told, a thug life very often ends in a thug death.
Rather than trying to scapegoat one of his victims (yes I said it, Zimmerman was the victim here) the parents should take a hard look at where Trayvons life was leading him. His mom knew he was a budding thug. THAT'S WHY SHE KICKED HIM OUT OF HER HOUSE. And he had to go stay with his dad.

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Bruce Hayden,

The problem here is that it isn't true for many late male adolescents, or, at least not at the level that appears to have been true for Martin. Sure, that may be the norm for the ghetto, but that is not the mainstream. ARM seems to be trying to define deviancy down to the level that it would include Martin.

Yes, this. There were some pot-smokers in my HS, but not, so far as I know, in my classes (OK, we had tracking, so my classes are a biased sample, but still.) No one in my classes ever got into physical fights with other students. No one was obsessed by guns, or caught bring one to school and showing it off.

The blanket "ALL teenage boys are into pot, fighting, and guns" is so preposterously off the mark that it's "not even wrong."

jr565 said...

Ironeails wrote:
"Which proves less than nothing. Lee was an extremely accomplished martial artist."

it proves that your point was moronic, since I showed that a small person who doesn't weigh much can still inflict lethal damage if they know how to fight.

ironrailsironweights said...

And, you still come back to the problem that he was coming into his male peak, while Zimmerman was a decade beyond it.

Of all male physical attributes, strength is the last one to peak and is retained the longest (in competitive powerlifting the "Juniors" category lasts until age 22 and the "Masters" category does not begin until age 40). The average 28-year-old male is much stronger than the average 17-year-old.

Peter

ironrailsironweights said...

a small person who doesn't weigh much can still inflict lethal damage if they know how to fight.

We have no evidence, other than some Twitter bravado, that Martin had any particular fighting knowledge.

Still, look at the recent photos of him in his wife-beater shirt. He had some muscle on him. No fat though, just lean muscle.

Black males often look a lot stronger than they really are because unless overweight they have proportionally less bodyfat than males of other races, and in turn this makes they appear more muscular.
Men of other races can reduce their bodyfat to a black male's level, but it takes a lot of effort and most don't bother.

Peter

AReasonableMan said...

ironrailsironweights said...
Of all male physical attributes, strength is the last one to peak and is retained the longest


Every teen male knows this intuitively. Although they can be violent to each other and might attack a single adult male when in a pack, teens know they aren't a match for most adult men.

Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter. He should not have gotten himself into a situation were he felt the need to use a gun. He was the adult in the position of power and was clearly incompetent. You don't need to evoke racism on either individuals part to come to this conclusion, which will almost certainly be the conclusion of the jury.

exhelodrvr1 said...

ARM,
So if someone puts themselves in a position where they could be assaulted by someone else, they are responsible if anything happens to the assaulter? Interesting logic.

TMink said...

I was watching CNN at a lunch joint as they "reported" about this. They said he was selling an "automatic" pistol. I cannot trust the reporting of an organization that cannot identify the most widely sold weapon in the US correctly.

Trey

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jr565 said...

Iron rails wrote:
Black males often look a lot stronger than they really are because unless overweight they have proportionally less bodyfat than males of other races, and in turn this makes they appear more muscular.
Men of other races can reduce their bodyfat to a black male's level, but it takes a lot of effort and most don't bother.

racist pop psychology is still pop psychology. And you sound like Jimmy The Greek with your black man body fat gobbledygook.
Why is it impossible to accept that Trayvon may have simply been able to punch Zimmerman in the face because he's a good enough fighter to punch an overweight dude in the face, , and then when he was on top of him continued punching him? isn't that the more reasonable explanation, rather than accepting the pop psychology of races as defined by you?

TMink said...

ARM wrote: "He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic."

So if someone is banging your head against the pavement after breaking your nose, the urge to defend yourself is blind panic?

Really?

That is completely un-reasonable.

Trey

TMink said...

I was watching CNN at a lunch joint as they "reported" about this. They said he was selling an "automatic" pistol. I cannot trust the reporting of an organization that cannot identify the most widely sold weapon in the US correctly.

Trey

Gahrie said...

He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic. He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that.

He should have just laid there and take it while his head was bashed in on the concrete.

Jay said...

AReasonableMan said...

Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter. He should not have gotten himself into a situation were he felt the need to use a gun. He was the adult in the position of power and was clearly incompetent.


You couldn't produce a single fact to support this moronic conclusion.

Gahrie said...

Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter. He should not have gotten himself into a situation were he felt the need to use a gun.

The bitch was asking for it. I bet he was dressed provocatively too....

AReasonableMan said...

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...
Yes, this. There were some pot-smokers in my HS, but not, so far as I know, in my classes (OK, we had tracking, so my classes are a biased sample, but still.) No one in my classes ever got into physical fights with other students. No one was obsessed by guns, or caught bring one to school and showing it off.

The blanket "ALL teenage boys are into pot, fighting, and guns" is so preposterously off the mark that it's "not even wrong."


This is cluelessly out of touch with how actual male teenagers behave. I was in HS forty years ago. It was a selective academic school in a suburban setting with an almost all white set of students. At least 80% of the males smoked marijuana and many grew weed. Fights between male students were routine as was bullying. Guns were rare where I lived but some kids would carry knives. I am not defending any of these behaviors. I think male teenagers as a group are seriously unhinged, but it is a very broad problem. Most of these individuals ended up ultimately in good jobs and reasonably well off financially. I am not so sure about their souls.

This is not a black/white issue. Check out any episode of Buckwild.

whoresoftheinternet said...

lol. People discover an obvious nigger was acting like an obvious nigger. Try to pretend it proves nothing, call for witch-burning of "racist, white" Zimmerman.

Shove fingers in ears, shout la la la!

Enjoy the decline, white gentile haters!

G Joubert said...

He should have just laid there and take it while his head was bashed in on the concrete

He should have just laid back and enjoyed it.

edutcher said...

AnUnreasonableTroll said...

Zimmerman may not be guilty of murder, but he still deserves our contempt for being too much of a p***y to fight

He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic. He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that.


"Tryavon" came at him, that's no "perceived" failing. Zimmerman had just gotten his head kicked and and defended himself.

To paraphrase William Tecumseh Sherman, when Choom's next son goes looking for trouble, may Troll be the citizen he finds.

Every teen male knows this intuitively. Although they can be violent to each other and might attack a single adult male when in a pack, teens know they aren't a match for most adult men.

Really?

And what data does Troll have to support this one, because I'll bet we could find a ton of anecdotal material about some kid showing off who took on somebody 10 or 20 years older.

My God, the trolls need some R&R since the Scandals of '13 started. They just babble on.

Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter.

He defended himself after being attacked. No manslaughter.

He should not have gotten himself into a situation were he felt the need to use a gun. He was the adult in the position of power and was clearly incompetent.

One could say the same about Troll trying to comment here.

This is cluelessly out of touch with how actual male teenagers behave. I was in HS forty years ago. It was a selective academic school in a suburban setting with an almost all white set of students. At least 80% of the males smoked marijuana and many grew weed. Fights between male students were routine as was bullying. Guns were rare where I lived but some kids would carry knives

Baloney.

I went to one of the best prep schools on the Philadelphia Main Line (graduated '66) and nothing like Troll wants us to believe happened was countenanced for a second. Troll sounds like he went to one of the high schools in "West Side Story".

He's pushing the new Lefty line for poor little oppressed "Trayvon" and thinks a line of bull will make it fly.

Hyphenated American said...


"Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter. He should not have gotten himself into a situation were he felt the need to use a gun. "

Martin should not have gotten himself into the situation where the person he attacked felt the need to use a gun for self-defense. Zimmerman is clearly innocent.

What we got here is clearly one of those situations when "youths" play a game of knock-out, so popular among certain progressive demographics. I hope Martin's death will convince some of those folks that the game may be a bit more dangerous that they expected. Hopefully responsible adults will start bringing guns to the game in order to make this game more useful for society.

Big Mike said...

He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that.

Zimmerman's not being tried for manslaughter. And if Martin jumped him, Zimmerman could have been knocked down before he knew what hit him. So Martin's actual failings as a human being certainly are material. Zimmerman's defense is that he suffered an unprovoked attack for which he was unprepared, was knocked down, was being beaten into unconsciousness, and ultimately was forced to defend himself with lethal force because that was his only remaining option.

You call yourself a "reasonable man," and just as Brutus was an honorable man I'm sure you truly are a reasonable man. So let me ask you, reasonably enough, whether there is anything in the evidence that is slowly filtering out that challenges Zimmerman's side of the story? Because unless the prosecution can demonstrate otherwise, then the only reasonable thing to do is acquit Zimmerman of all charges.

Oh, and probably disbar the prosecutors for egregious misconduct. That too.

jr565 said...

As someone else asked, if ARM thinks Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, then he must be pretty pissed that the prosecutor is overcharging him mith murder, right?

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Big Mike said...

@Hyphenated American, the Martin case is certainly making me wonder what the requirements are for a CCW permit in my state.

Levi Starks said...

Trayvon is starting to look a lot more like Obama's son than I'd have imagined at first.

AReasonableMan said...

jr565 said...
As someone else asked, if ARM thinks Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, then he must be pretty pissed that the prosecutor is overcharging him mith murder, right?


This seems to be a standard prosecutorial tactic, not unusual. Ultimately the issue will come down to perceptions of Zimmerman's competence, which will inevitably result in a manslaughter conviction. The guy is not going to walk after shooting an unarmed teenager. When a manslaughter conviction is assessed no one should be surprised or screaming racism, on either side.

Hyphenated American said...

"Ultimately the issue will come down to perceptions of Zimmerman's competence, which will inevitably result in a manslaughter conviction. The guy is not going to walk after shooting an unarmed teenager."

If this "unarmed teenager" is a thug who attacked Zimmerman, then Zimmerman should and will walk. And if there is anyone on the jury who suffered from the "youths" then it's difficult to imagine a conviction. If our civilization does not protect the citizen scrim the thugs, then what's the need for civilization?

jr565 said...

The guy is not going to walk after shooting an unarmed teenager.

If Trayvon is walking down street and is eating a packet of skittles and is gunned down and he's unarmed thats a far differnt cry than if someone who is unarmed is beating you in the face MMA with his fists. Fists are weapons if they are being used to break your face.

Hyphenated American said...

If our civilization does not protect the citizens from the savages then what's the need for civilization?

Big Mike said...

@ReasonableMan, unfair that you would answer a question posed to you at 1:16 without first answering my question posed to you at 1:15.

Bruce Hayden said...

Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter. He should not have gotten himself into a situation were he felt the need to use a gun. He was the adult in the position of power and was clearly incompetent. You don't need to evoke racism on either individuals part to come to this conclusion, which will almost certainly be the conclusion of the jury.

Let's start from the top. Zimmerman is not being tried for manslaughter, but rather 2nd degree murder. If he indeed were being tried just for manslaughter, which is much more realistic, then the only question would be whether or not he killed in self defense, and that would have to be established beyond a reasonable doubt by the state to overcome his defense. But, with 2nd degree murder, more than mere killing is required. So, some sort of animus, depraved mind, etc. must be established as an additional element beyond a reasonable doubt.

Secondly, Zimmerman lived in that community. Martin was visiting his father whose girlfriend lived there. Zimmerman had every right to be where he was, and your suggestion that he shouldn't have been is just plain sillly. You are essentially suggesting that giving over the area around your house to thugs and criminals is suffiently negligent to take the case from manslaughter to 2nd Degree Murder. That is just plain sillly. It is one thing to argue that maybe going into a bad part of town is stupid, but something else entirely when that is where you lived - and it doesn't appear to have been that bad of an area - it was gated, and didn't have much in crime, except for a recent spate of burglaries (which Martin may have been involved in, given his emails, tweats, unexplained gold grill, and that he had been caught with stolen jewelry before - all possibly indicating that he was engaging in such at times).

Third, you are ignoring that most of the evidence, and pretty much all of the physical evidence points to Martin being the aggressor. He appears to have approached Zimmerman, attacked him, knocked him down, beat his head into the concrete while over him, and maybe even lunged for the gun. Both of them had physical injuries consistant with that interpretation, and none with any contrary interpretations.

Fourth, it is not in the public interest to adopt your theory, that people should give over control of their communities to the most violent. Those who threaten the community with violence should be locked up (or, in cases like this, killed) instead of being rewarded by giving them defference for their violent behavior.

Finally, I think that it is sillly for you to predict a prosecution win at this point, esp. when they are going to have to both prove the aggrevating factors and disprove self-defense, beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury has yet to be picked, and I, for one, if I were on the jury, would not be cutting Martin the sort of slack that you seem to be doing. All it would take for a not guilty verdict would be to get a couple of people like me on the jury.

Drago said...

arm: "The guy is not going to walk after shooting an unarmed teenager."

Notice how arm continues to write as if Zimmerman walked up to an innocent trayvon and simply pulled the trigger.

arm must also be waiting for the charges to be reinstated against the Duke Lacrosse players and the cops that "assaulted" Tawana.

And besides, those mensheviks had it coming too....

jr565 said...

If Mike Tyson were back in his pre boxing days, he'd terrorize you on the street with his unarmed fists as he mugged you on the street. If a teenage mike Tyson were standing over you beating you on your skill with his fists MMA style, are you telling me that somehow you woulnd't be in legitimate fear for your life?
Not saying that Trayvon was a brute like Tyson, but Mike Tyson, before being a famous boxer was just some nameless thug.
The principle is, if someone, anyone, is standing over you and punching you in your face MMA style, and has already broken your nose do you have a right to defend yourself?
Punches to the face can be lethal. How many should you have to endure before you can say that the intent of the person punching you may be to actually hurt you?
Three punches? Ten punches? Broken cheek bone? Caved in skull?

Drago said...

Bruce: "Third, you are ignoring that most of the evidence, and pretty much all of the physical evidence points to Martin being the aggressor"

The lefties have a habit of "forgetting" to include the most salient points.

It's almost as if they know they are spewing BS and any non-BS laden comments they might offer could not withstand even cursory scrutiny.

Drago said...

jr565: "The principle is, if someone, anyone, is standing over you and punching you in your face MMA style, and has already broken your nose do you have a right to defend yourself?"

This kind of question flummoxes the modern leftist.

They cannot begin to answer until they know the race/gender/class/sexual orientation of those involved.

Only then can one make the proper political assessment of who is to blame and who is the victim.

bpm4532 said...

If Obama had a son, Trayvon would be it.

jr565 said...

Drago wrote:
They cannot begin to answer until they know the race/gender/class/sexual orientation of those involved.

Only then can one make the proper political assessment of who is to blame and who is the victim.


I have to agree with the racial aspect of this. If this were two white guys fighting and one of them was on top of the other beating him MMA style and the other shot him in self defense, would there be much of an outcry at all?
They have to make it a racial issue that feeds into their narrative of the racist America and the Racist white guy killing the poor black guy. When it doesn't fit the narrative and it turns out that Zimmerman is hispanic, then he's a White Hispanic.
They have to show a picture of Trayvon when he was 13 and all innocent looking as opposed to the picture of him right before he died. and they simply Can't have any digging into his history to determine who he actually was.(Even though it's ok to delve into Zimmerman's past to show that he was a violent racist - not that they actually showed that mind you)

AReasonableMan said...

Bruce Hayden said...
Secondly, Zimmerman lived in that community. Zimmerman had every right to be where he was, and your suggestion that he shouldn't have been is just plain sillly.


I never suggested that he shouldn't be there. Zimmerman was acting as a representative of the homeowner's association when he initially approached and then shot and killed Trayvon Martin. The settlement by the homeowner's association concedes their responsibility for Martin's death, which was the employment of an incompetent individual in a position for which he was clearly not qualified. A manslaughter conviction is the only possible outcome here.

Alex said...

The most shocking thing is how George Z. let himself go in jail. He's obese now.

Alex said...

Trayvon - a hero and martyr to all Skittle-munchers everywhere.

jr565 said...

If this story were reversed and it about Trayvon Martin, local neighborhood watch who sees a stranger in the gated commnity that he was watching because of a series of break ins and who gets cold cocked by that stranger (a thuggish George Zimmerman) who then stood over Trayvon and proceeded to punch him MMA style in the face, I would similarly side with the guy getting his face punched in.

And, I'd imagine if George Zimmerman really were white, and not Hispanic white, then the left would all be about how Trayvon was defending himself from the angry white male trying to kill him.

And if George were getting kicked out of school and forced to live with his dad because of thuggish behavior, and if he was involved in drugs, and if he were in multiple fights, it would be imperative that we know that history because it shows that the racist white guy was trouble.

I can say that regardless of race, the guy getting his face pummeled had a right to defend himself.
Because I'm not trying to push some racial narrative.


Bruce Hayden said...

This seems to be a standard prosecutorial tactic, not unusual. Ultimately the issue will come down to perceptions of Zimmerman's competence, which will inevitably result in a manslaughter conviction. The guy is not going to walk after shooting an unarmed teenager. When a manslaughter conviction is assessed no one should be surprised or screaming racism, on either side.

Earth to ARM - Zimmerman is being tried for 2nd Degree Murder, and not manslaughter.

Normally, when we talk about overcharging, that would mean charging Zimmerman with 2nd Degree Murder, Manslaughter, assault with a deadly weapon, bad paperwork for his CCW permit, etc. Actually not most of those, since they are all included (or merged) in the 2nd Degree Murder, etc., charges. Rather, it is more the case where the additional charges can stand on their own. For example, about a decade ago, we were trying to get my secretary's daughter's boyfriend off the streets, and were feeding potential evidence to all the law enforcement agencies we could think of (PHX PD, AZ DPS, FBI, Secret Service, DEA, etc.) Nothing happened, then they popped him for 4 counts of crimes against children (minimum 20 year sentences), and used our stuff to charge him with another 15-20 felonies, ranging from making meth, forging checks, etc. This was dealt down to 2 concurrent 20 year terms, with everything except two of the crimes against children and two of the other felonies dropped.

Here, I think that they probably should have also included a manslaughter charge, but apparently didn't for political reasons, possibly figuring that they didn't want to give a jury an easier out. But, as I pointed out above, they are now stuck with both proving the aggravating factors required for 2nd degree, and disproving self-defense, both beyond a reasonable doubt. So, all the jury needs to do to find Zimmerman not guilty is to either believe his self-defense claim, or disbelieve the depraved mind element of the charge (meaning either proving extremely gross negligence or racial animosity).

Jay said...

Zimmerman was acting as a representative of the homeowner's association when he initially approached and then shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

Um, no he wasn't.

He never "approached" Martin.

You have a nutty narrative of events there, troll.

jr565 said...

Jay wrote:
"Um, no he wasn't.

He never "approached" Martin.

You have a nutty narrative of events there, troll."


He never STALKED him either. I love how they keep using code words signifying something different than the reality. He was UNARMED. No, he was BEATING SOMEONE with his fists. He was STALKING. No, Zimmerman followed him for a few seconds after the dispatcher asked where he was going, then stopped when the dispatcher told him he didn'thave to do that. (And the dispatcher didnt' ORDER him to stop doing that). WE have the audio of the conversation. You can hear when Zimmerman gets out of the car and when the dispatcher asks him if he's following Trayvon (who had at that point ducked around the corner and disappeared) and when Zimmerman says Yes and is told he doesn't have to continue. It's like 8 seconds. How is that a STALKING?

Alex said...

jr - so suddenly Trayvon was an MMA fighter? Will you cons ever learn?

Bruce Hayden said...

ARM - would be interested in the settlement agreement between the HOA and the Martin family. Does it really admit that Zimmerman was working as their representative at the time? Or, are you imputing that.

Still, even if the HOA had stipulated such, it has little bearing on either reality or Zimmerman's trial. Likely not get it into evidence, because what is relevant there is what Zimmerman thought at the time, and not what was agreed to by two parties not directly involved in the alleged crime. One problem is that the HOA may have been offered different settlement values if they did or did not agree to stipulate that Zimmerman was their agent at the time. Another is that there is a good chance that some, if not all, of the settlement was from insurance. In that case, the insurance company typically calls a lot of the shots in terms of the settlement conditions.

jr565 said...

Further, that too is perfectly in keeping with Zimmerman's story about how Trayvon cold cocked him. Because after he loses sight of Trayvon George has a long conversation with the cops about how he lost him, and then where to meet the cops when they come to the gated community. Clearly at that point, Zimmerman doesn't know where Trayvon is since he otherwise wouldn't be talking casually to the cops.

Sam L. said...

Talk Left printed that? Nail them to the wall and shoot them at dawn for heresy and treason to the Left!

SteveR said...

ARM-you can't have it both ways, your unreasonable liberal side wants Zimmerman convicted of murder, you know any white person killing the baby faced 12 year old Trayvon is guilty of that. But you know better and you're settling for manslaughter. The state is going for 2nd degree murder to give the race baiters some sugar and like the Rodney King trial, the innocent verdict on an overcharge will still be viewed as evidence of racism which people like you encourage. Thanks for being the grown up.

AReasonableMan said...

jr565 said...
If this were two white guys fighting


Race is irrelevant in this case. Zimmerman was acting in an official capacity for the homeowners association, albeit one step lower than a mall cop. The homeowner's association have washed their hands of him. The police advised him to stop his actions, so he will not get any support there. He initiated this conflict on his own volition and lacking the skills to extract himself committed manslaughter. There does not have to be any appeal to race or racism to come to this conclusion.

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jr565 said...

ARM wrote:

Race is irrelevant in this case. Zimmerman was acting in an official capacity for the homeowners association, albeit one step lower than a mall cop. The homeowner's association have washed their hands of him. The police advised him to stop his actions, so he will not get any support there. He initiated this conflict on his own volition and lacking the skills to extract himself committed manslaughter. There does not have to be any appeal to race or racism to come to this conclusion.

Crap, crap, crap and more crap. (Except the part about the not having to be any appeal to race to come to this conclusion. There SHOULDN"T be. But, alas, that's your sides entire argument.

jr565 said...

Alex wrote:
"jr - so suddenly Trayvon was an MMA fighter? Will you cons ever learn?"


I take it that you are being sarcastic, here. But for those who aren't, that was what the eyewitness described Trayvon as doing.
Here is the quote:
“a black male, wearing a dark colored ‘hoodie’ on top of a white or Hispanic male who was yelling for help.” The black male, he added, “was mounted on the white or Hispanic male and throwing punches ‘MMA (mixed martial arts) style.'”


IT was George screaming for help, not Trayvon. Trayvon was beating him MMA style about the head while he kneeled over him. And Georges facea and skull, not to mention Trayvons knuckles conform to the eyewitness statement.

Jay said...

Zimmerman was acting in an official capacity for the homeowners association,

No he wasn't.

You're simply here making up bullshit.

jr565 said...

ARM was George on duty or off duty at the time?
Do you even know?

Rabel said...

Peter,

I think you're underestimating the effect of a successful sucker punch when you're not expecting it.

Happened to me once, way, way back when I thought I was a bad ass.

Chip S. said...

OK, so the Obama presidency has completely sucked policy-wise, but at least now our society is no longer obsessed w/ race.

Definitely worth it.

edutcher said...

AnUnreasonableTroll said...

If this were two white guys fighting

Race is irrelevant in this case.


Would Troll be calling our young malefactor "Trayvon" if race was irrelevant.

"You know, if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon*," Mr. Obama said.

Mr. Zimmerman, 28, a white Hispanic

Suuure it is.

* Especially the choom part.

Cedarford said...

All sort of fun details in there, and more awaiting disclosure.

1. While Sharptons ally Crump was mau-mauing in the media for a murder trial, he was simultaneously working the civil tort legal system, shaking down the Homeowners Asssociation for a large sum of money for himself and the "grieving parents". Which he got, in an out of court settlement, and didn't disclose to the defense the details of.

2. Martin apparantly has several messages about his strong need to get money to buy drugs and a particular .40 cal pistol he fancied.

3. He apparantly filmed himself holding another 9mm or 40 cal.

4. He sought out fighting action as fun, discussed people he was looking to "mess up".

5. Zimmerman defenders were wrong about him being an active football player at the time of the shooting. He had dropped out of organized sports at 14.

6. Media had photos of a hoodied Trayvon towering over a store clerk, but didn't run it. Even though the clerk's statements were newsworthy - that he feared Martin, found his appearance menacing, and worried he was about to be robbed.

7. Revelation that Trayvon's momma actually was in the process of booting the "little angel" out because his behavior was uncontrollable. That she was trying to get the father to take him in permanently and straighten him out in respect to school, drugs, and thug behavior.

8. Not that it matters a whole lot, but the circle of advisors doing the whole "innocent child armed only with skittles and ice tea"...changed the actual watermelon tea's name for PC..and the media went with it.

9. The Defense, from the GF's deposition, knows that Trayvon Martin told her he had reached his Dad's apartment doorstep and had lost sight of the guy who had been watching him and pissed him off. Who then doubled back 70 yards to locate Zimmerman, and once found, confront and jump him at the scene of the attack and shooting. (not from the GF, but from the measurements and photos showing distance and fact the Dad's apartment was out of line of sight of where Zimmerman was and his own statement and call to police that he lost sight of Martin and was walking to his car.

Jay said...

The left simply can not speak to this topic without lying.

AReasonableMan said...

Bruce Hayden said...
Here, I think that they probably should have also included a manslaughter charge


So we are in agreement on this and presumably also on the likelihood of conviction.

Also of considerable importance, 'the lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting'.

My sole point is that if prosecuted in a competent manner no one should be surprised if Zimmerman was convicted for manslaughter. There is no need to appeal to racism on either side to view this as a reasonable outcome. I find the reactions to this case mostly hysterical on both sides, although the initial failure to prosecute was indefensible.

Cedarford said...

Jeralyn, at Talk Left, was one of the earlier voices warning the Left and the progressive Jewish/black racist voices in media and activist circles they had created a false national "Narrative" of a "Black Rape Victim of Evil Whites" - in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case.

The case rested on the lies of a whore now in a life, no probation jail status for 1st degree murder and a concurrent arson sentence. And on an evil, politically motivated Prosecutor, Mike Nifong.

Jay said...

Also of considerable importance, 'the lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting'.

OOPS!

In a separate interview with the FBI, however, Serino told agents that he was feeling the pressure to file charges against Zimmerman

Don't worry troll, that is too inconvenient for you to acknowledge.

Jay said...

'the lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting'.

Also of considerable importance:

Sanford Police Officer Chris Serino first made headlines when evidence released in the case showed he sought manslaughter charges against Zimmerman even while his chief publicly said there was no probable cause to arrest him. But a document released late Thursday casts doubt on Serino’s prior sworn affidavit seeking criminal charges, and raises questions about the credibility of the star law-enforcement witness in the murder case against Zimmerman for the shooting death of a black teenager, Miami Gardens high school junior Trayvon Martin..



In other words, you're full of shit.

AReasonableMan said...

Chip S. said...
but at least now our society is no longer obsessed w/ race.


To be fair, it seems to be mainly the white guys on this board that are obsessed with the race aspect of the case.

I guess you could argue that Martin's parents dragged race into the case but they were rightly appalled at the initial failure to prosecute Zimmerman and weren't in a position to walk down to the local country club and complain to the police chief over drinks. There does not seem to be much doubt that Zimmerman should have been prosecuted. I think the murder charge is overreach, manslaughter would be a reasonable charge, a conclusion that the lead detective made at the time.

Jay said...

a conclusion that the lead detective made at the time.

No he didn't, you silly liar.

Alex said...

Not obsessed with race? Ritmo only brings it up every single fucking time.

Cedarford said...

ARM - Also of considerable importance, 'the lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting'.

ARM to build the Left's case, now attaches reverence to the opinion of one cop on the scene who in absence of any formal review of all the evidence, wanted charges before the full investigation had concluded and a DA had reviewed the matter looking at the law as an offocer of the court. And against the opinion of other cops who made a different recommendation to the DA.

I thought the Left loves to spout "Rule of Law"??
But here we have Lefty ARM saying that you don't need to know anything other than what one zealot cop, disagreeing with other cops WANTS..even before all the evidence is gathered.
I thought under "Rule of Law", unless it is clear or under reasonable cause, the Left frowns on the idea of one cop among many disagreeing with him on this and several other cases - to have the power to arrest, charge and toss someone in jail.


pst314 said...

"The police advised him to stop his actions, so he will not get any support there. He initiated this conflict on his own volition"

Not true. When the police advised Zimmerman to stop following Trayvon, he returned to his vehicle. It was at that time that Trayvon confronted him, cold-cocked him, and started beating his head into the concrete.

The so-called AReasonableMan clearly has a deep affection for thugs, and hatred for ordinary citizens.

edutcher said...

AnUnreasonableTroll said...

To be fair, it seems to be mainly the white guys on this board that are obsessed with the race aspect of the case.

To be fair, it seems to be mainly the white guys on this board that are obsessed with the race aspect of the case.
/sarc

FIFY

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

AReasonableMan,

This is cluelessly out of touch with how actual male teenagers behave. I was in HS forty years ago. It was a selective academic school in a suburban setting with an almost all white set of students. At least 80% of the males smoked marijuana and many grew weed. Fights between male students were routine as was bullying. Guns were rare where I lived but some kids would carry knives. I am not defending any of these behaviors. I think male teenagers as a group are seriously unhinged, but it is a very broad problem.

Nah. Not my school. Now, I was bullied, sure, but always by other girls, and nearly always verbally. (There was one time when three girls cornered me in the library, pinched me, and pulled my hair, but that was in 6th grade.) There weren't any fisticuffs among my classmates. No guns, no knives. There was a wannabe swaggering "tough dude" culture among some of the students, but it was pretty pathetic.

Æthelflæd said...

ARM said... "He also deserves our contempt for shooting an unarmed teenager in a blind panic. He is unquestionably guilty of manslaughter and all the gnashing of teeth with regards to Martin's perceived or actual failings as a human being isn't going to change that."

British laws making the populace helpless to defend itself aren't going to fly here.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

ARM,

To be fair, it seems to be mainly the white guys on this board that are obsessed with the race aspect of the case.

I don't think most of us have so mentioned "the race aspect of the case." Except possibly to comment, way back, on how anxious the media were to label Zimmermann a "white Hispanic" once they discovered that the dude with the German-sounding name was in fact exactly as Peruvian as Barack Obama is Kenyan -- namely, 50%. Oops.

AReasonableMan said...

Jay,

From your own link, "Tapes of Serino's interviews with Zimmerman show him poking holes in the former neighborhood watch volunteer’s account of what happened the night he killed Trayvon. Serino told the FBI that Zimmerman had a “little hero complex” and sounded “scripted.”"

To the extent that Serino was pressured it was by his fellow officers. This is hardly surprising. In any workplace there will be a diversity of views on what should happen. It is clear that Serino had his own doubts about Zimmerman's story.

Some months ago posters on this board were in near uniform agreement that Zimmerman would be able to mount a successful “Stand-Your-Ground” self-defense, thereby avoiding a criminal trial. Given how wrong-headed this turned out to be, maybe it is worthwhile considering how much of the rest of the country views this case.

exhelodrvr1 said...

So now you think how the "rest of the country" views the case should determine the verdict?

William said...

Comments I would only make on the internet: I don't think the parents were especially vigilant or conscientious in the raising of their son. The kid was obviously acting up and acting out. Nonetheless, they have already won a million dollar settlement, and there is the prospect of more to come. Trayvon was the catastrophic loser in this confrontation, but Zimmerman's life is also ruined. The big winners here are the lawyers and parents.....This week and next a few dozen black teenagers will be killed under far less ambiguous circumstances than those of Trayvon. You won't hear anything about them. No million dollar settlement, no outrage.......Also, one notes that La Raza is not taking up the cause of George Zimmerman. He's being railroaded, but not by the right people. Hispanic activism is not about justice but about white injustice.....If Zimmerman should get convicted, it will add a level or cynicism and distrust to race relations that will not soon be dissipated.

AReasonableMan said...

exhelodrvr1 said...
So now you think how the "rest of the country" views the case should determine the verdict?


Given that it is trial by jury rather than trial by Althouse posters, doesn't this seem reasonable?

AReasonableMan said...

William said...
The big winners here are the ... parents.


This is too cynical. I doubt the parents feel like winners.

Cedarford said...

Jay said...
The left simply can not speak to this topic without lying.

======================
It's shaking out like Twanna and the Duke rape case. the Left, obsessed with moral and criminal equivolency between races and religions...craves, along with the profit motive of liberal and progressive journalist media - to make huge national cases about Evil Whites persecuting angelic minorities and evil right wing terrorists that are the Real Threat.
Huge national cases so the Left can "instruct the masses" in a "teachable moment".

But they keep picking real dogs - Tawanna, murderess/arsonist and psychotic liar Crystal Mangum, and pure gangsta thug Trayvon Martin. Horrible right wing terrorists that turn out to be some drunken goober talking about crashing the White House gates with his John Deere tractor

And duly ignoring as much as they can - Islamoid terror, black-on black, black on other races thuggery.



Big Mike said...

Some months ago posters on this board were in near uniform agreement that Zimmerman would be able to mount a successful “Stand-Your-Ground” self-defense, thereby avoiding a criminal trial.

Well my recollection is a bit different. Most of us thought that "stand your ground" was irrelevant, that Zimmerman has testified that he was attacked. "Stand your ground" only applies if there is a reasonable opportunity to retreat.

Again, Mr. "reasonable man," address my question from 1:15. Zimmerman's story is that he was the victim of an unprovoked attack which he was not prepared for, and was put in a position (flat on his back, with a head injury, and being seriously pummeled) where his only resort was lethal force. Is there anything in the evidence released to date that contradicts this account?

Lefties everywhere take note: we have an unalienable right to self defense. If you put yourself in a position where someone needs to use lethal force to defend themselves from you, that is your problem and not theirs.

Drago said...

arm: "To be fair, it seems to be mainly the white guys on this board that are obsessed with the race aspect of the case"

LOL

I wonder if the "white Hispanic" would agree with that?

LOL

No one, and I mean no one, is more obsessed with race aspect of this case than the left.

That arm is now projecting the lefts modus operandi onto the right shows how far their "hopes and dreams" about this case have fallen.

Drago said...

Big Mike: "Well my recollection is a bit different. Most of us thought that "stand your ground" was irrelevant, that Zimmerman has testified that he was attacked. "Stand your ground" only applies if there is a reasonable opportunity to retreat"

Absolutely correct.

Shocker: arm now needs to rewrite history.

Well, the left has a lot of practice in that area.

Big Mike said...

This is too cynical. I doubt the parents feel like winners.

They got rid of a problem child and made a substantial sum of money doing it (reported in excess of one million dollars). If Trayvon had died in a gang-related incident they wouldn't have made a cent.

Drago said...

Big Mike: "Is there anything in the evidence released to date that contradicts this account?"

No.

But Zimmerman is a white Hispanic, so guilty! And shut up! Because "Bush"!!

Cedarford said...

The so-called AReasonableMan clearly has a deep affection for thugs, and hatred for ordinary citizens.

-------------------
That is always the problem of those who "take up the cause" of the enemy, of violent thugs....pretty soon, many of these sympathizers in effect become indistinguishable from the views and goals of the Confederates, the black thugs, the Nazis, the Soviet Global communist movement, the imprisoned Al Qaeda jihadis - they champion.

The laws of most coutries, save recently in the all-too PC and liberal post 60s West - recognize that such sympathy can gravely damage a society and make being an enemy sympathizer or a seditionist a criminal offense.

jr565 said...

This blogger went into a lot of the Trayvon history and came up with some interesting stuff.

Trayvon Martin - What Were the last 18 months like for him?

He goes into Trayvon's You Tube account at his subscriptions, where his interests lie. And one of the subscriptions he's subscribed to is to "Arm Wrestling Brother". If you go to there, as the blogger did, you find that its all about MMA street fighting, including many videos of actual street fights. If you tie that interest into the discussion of Trayvon where he talks about being in a few fights, two of which he won, you can tell, that that is an interest of Trayvons, and one acted on in his life.

Apply it to the actual case and you realize that Trayvon had an interest in MMA and apparently knew how to fight. So, if hes on top of George and punching him MMA style, its probably because he's familiar with how to do so.

Bruce Hayden said...

Bruce Hayden said...
Here, I think that they probably should have also included a manslaughter charge

So we are in agreement on this and presumably also on the likelihood of conviction.


Huh? I state that Florida should have filed manslaughter charges instead of 2nd degree murder charges, because the state is going to have a tough time proving the additional element of depraved mind, etc., and your response is that we are in agreement?

Let me go through this more slowly and carefully.

1. Zimmerman killed Martin by shooting him with his gun, for which he had a legal concealed carry permit at the time.

2. Zimmerman is claiming self-defense.

3. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of another.

4. Since Zimmerman has repeatedly admitted the killing, the only issues that the state would have to prove to convict of manslaughter is that the killing is unlawful, that Zimmerman committed culpable negligence (702.07(1)), and would have to disprove his self-defense claim, all beyond a reasonable doubt. Normally, manslaughter is a 2nd degree felony, but since Martin was under 18, it would be considered aggravated manslaughter of a child (702.07(3)), a 1st degree felony.

5. The state of Florida did not charge Zimmerman with criminal manslaughter, so the above analysis is irrelevant. Instead, they charged him with 2nd Degree Murder.

6. Second degree murder is defined to be The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual (702.04(2)), which is also a 1st degree felony. This is the crime that Zimmerman is actually charged with. Right now, it is the only charge that the jury will see.

7. The 2nd degree murder for which Zimmerman is charged has the additional elements of 1) an act that is "imminently dangerous to another" and 2) "evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life", in addition to the elements required for conviction of criminal manslaughter.

8. The depraved mind element is defined (in jury instructions) to require:
a) A “person of ordinary judgment” would know the act, or series of acts, “is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another”;
b) The act is “done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent”; and
c) The act is “of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.”

9. The state is required to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt in order to prove a case of 2nd Degree Murder. Esp. problematic are the proofs of (b) (ill will) and (c) (indifference).

10. Therefore, the state, in charging Zimmerman with 2nd Degree Murder instead of criminal manslaughter, significantly increased the burden of proof required of them for a conviction.

So, I would suggest that unless you agree that the state has little chance of making their case, we are not in agreement as to what the jury will decide.

AReasonableMan said...

Cedarford said...
The so-called AReasonableMan clearly has a deep affection for thugs, and hatred for ordinary citizens.
-------------------
That is always the problem of those who "take up the cause" of the enemy, of violent thugs


Everyone seems very anxious to convict Martin of any number of thought crimes, but to the relief of the general public thought crimes are still not actual crimes. No one mentions that Zimmerman has an actual record having been arrested for resisting an officer without violence and resisting an officer with violence. His ex-fiancee filed a civil motion for a restraining order alleging domestic violence.

While there are no angels here, based on the evidence of their records it is far from clear that anyone defending Martin is on the side of the 'thugs'.

AReasonableMan said...

Big Mike said...
Zimmerman's story is that he was the victim of an unprovoked attack


But this is obvious nonsense since he initiated the contact with Martin by getting out of his car despite police warning.

Martin had every right to be walking along that street unmolested. What people that post on here don't seem to get is that the general public is not comfortable with Mall cops confronting and shooting members other members of the public for no discernible reason other than incompetence. This is not race based, this is a general discomfort with the proliferation of armed pseudo-cops with an attitude and no brains.

AReasonableMan said...

Bruce Hayden said...
I state that Florida should have filed manslaughter charges instead of 2nd degree murder charges, because the state is going to have a tough time proving the additional element of depraved mind, etc., and your response is that we are in agreement?


My sole point is that Zimmerman would almost certainly be convicted if charged with manslaughter. You seem to agree with this. Most posters appear to find this inconceivable.

Hyphenated American said...

"But this is obvious nonsense since he initiated the contact with Martin by getting out of his car despite police warning. "

First of all, it's only alleged that zimmerman initiated the contact with Martin, no evidence exists to prove it. Secondly, it's a free country, Zimmerman has a constitutional right to get out of his car and walk around and not being attacked by anyone. The police has no right to detain Zimmerman in his solely,based on their suspicion that he can be attacked by a suspect. In fact, the argument that Zimmerman had an obligation to stay in his car because otherwise Martin would attack him is clearly a very disturbing claim.

"Martin has every right to be walking along that street unmolested"

There is evidence that Zimmerman "molested" Martin. There is plenty of evidence that Martin molested Zimmerman.

Hyphenated American said...

"Everyone seems very anxious to convict Martin of any number of thought crimes, but to the relief of the general public thought crimes are still not actual crimes"

Martin is dead, so he is in no danger of being convicted of any crimes. There are rather indications that Martin was a violent thug, who attacked Zimmerman. Beating someone up is not a " thought crime". On the other side, there is no evidence that Zimmerman did anything wrong illegal. The worst you can say is that he took a walk in his neighborhood in spite of police warnings, was attacked by a thug, and shot him in self-defense.

Hyphenated American said...

There is evidence that Zimmerman "molested" Martin. There is plenty of evidence that Martin molested Zimmerman."

Correction. There is no evidence that Zimmerman "molested" Martin, but there is plenty of evidence that Martin molested Zimmerman.

Bruce Hayden said...

ARM - you are apparently ignoring Zimmerman's defense of self-defense, which the state must disprove beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't think that they can even do so under the much lower predominance of the evidence standard, with the evidence we have seen so far.

But yes. If the state had filed manslaughter charges instead of 2nd degree murder, and if Zimmerman didn't have a colorable and credible self-defense claim, which he does, I would agree that the state would have a decent chance of a conviction.

But note that all we are talking is probabilities here. You get the right jurors, and there is a decent chance that enough of them would figure that Martin was playing dice with Darwin, and lost.

AReasonableMan said...

Bruce Hayden said...
You get the right jurors, and there is a decent chance that enough of them would figure that Martin was playing dice with Darwin,


Zimmerman was acting as a rogue vigilante not an agent of Darwinian selection.

Again, I think most posters are viewing this too narrowly. We don't want people like George Zimmerman, armed and out on the street looking for trouble. It is incredible that the HOA could have authorized this guy given his record and they have conceded this in the civil settlement. I think it most likely that the jurors will send the same message.

AReasonableMan said...

Hyphenated American said...
the argument that Zimmerman had an obligation to stay in his car because otherwise Martin would attack him is clearly a very disturbing claim.


But it was Zimmerman who was making the claim that Martin was a public menace. You can't have it both ways.

Big Mike said...

But this is obvious nonsense since he initiated the contact with Martin by getting out of his car despite police warning.

Not quite right. He was already out of his truck (not a car) and was directed to go back in. There is no evidence that he did anything at that point other than return to his truck.

Martin had every right to be walking along that street unmolested.

Yes. However that does not imply a right for him attack anyone else.

What people that post on here don't seem to get is that the general public is not comfortable with Mall cops confronting and shooting members other members of the public for no discernible reason other than incompetence.

A total non sequitur. The reality-based commentators on this thread are saying that once Martin attacked Zimmerman, Zimmerman had a right -- an unalienable right! -- to defend his life.

This is not race based,

Of course not! Although one can ask why, if you view it as not race-based why you keep dragging the red herring of race into the issue?

... this is a general discomfort with the proliferation of armed pseudo-cops with an attitude and no brains.

I for one am perfectly comfortable with our neighborhood watch program. In my neighborhood everyone knows everyone, so if someone strange is walking through, we notice. And Zimmerman seems to have followed the police directions to return to his truck when they told him to do so. The evidence shows that Martin got to the house where he and his father were staying, but he decided to go back out -- in the rain -- and attack Zimmerman. Martin could have stayed home, and he might still be alive.

AReasonableMan said...

Big Mike said...
I for one am perfectly comfortable with our neighborhood watch program.


On the night of the shooting Zimmerman left his vehicle to pursue Martin and was carrying a gun, both of which go against neighborhood watch recommendations. So, would you be perfectly comfortable with Zimmerman, with a record of violence, as a member of your neighborhood watch program?

Big Mike said...

So, would you be perfectly comfortable with Zimmerman, with a record of violence, as a member of your neighborhood watch program?

Yes. Next question?

AReasonableMan said...

Big Mike said...
Yes. Next question?


I think this is illogical given the goals of neighborhood watch. I would not want this nitwit thug armed and patrolling my neighborhood looking for trouble. I can't imagine any of my neighbors thinking differently.

Hyphenated American said...

"Zimmerman was acting as a rogue vigilante not an agent of Darwinian selection. "

There is no evidence of that. So far what we do know is that Zimmerman called the police to inform them of a suspicious man. Based on all information known today Zimmerman was 100% correct about this assessment of Martin. There is also an unsubstantiated allegation that Zimmerman proceeded to confront Martin, but no evidence of that is shown.

All in all, no evidence was shown that Zimmerman was a rogue vigilante. And all the evidence shows that Zimmerman used violence strictly in self-defense. No contrary evidence was ever demonstrated.

Hyphenated American said...

"On the night of the shooting Zimmerman left his vehicle to pursue Martin and was carrying a gun, both of which go against neighborhood watch recommendations."

I believe it's perfectly fine for a neighborhood watch to leave their cars. I also can see that carrying a gun saved an innocent life here and send a message to thugs that this community is not to be bullied.

So, would you be perfectly comfortable with Zimmerman, with a record of violence, as a member of your neighborhood watch program?"

No violence was proven in case of Zimmerman. Most importantly, I want to live in a community which is known as thug-unfriendly.

Hyphenated American said...

"On the night of the shooting Zimmerman left his vehicle to pursue Martin and was carrying a gun, both of which go against neighborhood watch recommendations."

I believe it's perfectly fine for a neighborhood watch to leave their cars. I also can see that carrying a gun saved an innocent life here and send a message to thugs that this community is not to be bullied.

So, would you be perfectly comfortable with Zimmerman, with a record of violence, as a member of your neighborhood watch program?"

No violence was proven in case of Zimmerman. Most importantly, I want to live in a community which is known as thug-unfriendly.

Hyphenated American said...

"I think this is illogical given the goals of neighborhood watch."

You need to understand that America is a very diverse country, and different neighborhood watches may have different methods to achieve the goal of lower crime goals.

"I would not want this nitwit thug armed and patrolling my neighborhood looking for trouble."

There is no evidence that Zimmerman was looking for trouble. And you personally may have one view about Zimmerman - and other people may have another. I believe that for communities devastated by the thugs and scum like Martin, Zimmerman may be seen as a hero.


"I can't imagine any of my neighbors thinking differently."

Failure of imagination is not an argument.

Hyphenated American said...

"But it was Zimmerman who was making the claim that Martin was a public menace. You can't have it both ways. "

Zimmerman said that Martin was showing suspicious behavior - and all we know now confirms that Zimmerman made a perfectly accurate assessment of Martin. Of course, Zimmerman had no obligation to stay in the car - it's a free country. There is no law that says that citizens must be hiding when thugs are walking our streets. If this is you main argument against Zimmerman, then you clearly want this nation to be controlled by thugs.

Big Mike said...

@Hyphenated American, my analysis of the mis-proclaimed "reasonable" man is that his objection is to Zimmerman having the temerity to be armed and to use his handgun to save his life.

There are lots of people who are totally freaked by guns, and "reasonable" man is probably one of them. They have made the decision not to fight back, and cannot understand anyone who does.

Don't lose sleep over him.

jr565 said...

AReasonable man wrote:

But this is obvious nonsense since he initiated the contact with Martin by getting out of his car despite police warning.


Clearly you are talking out of your ass since you are making things up. That never happened. The police did not warn him to not get out of his car. They didn't warn him of anything. They asked him where he trayvon was going. At that point Zimmerman gout out of his car to see where Trayvon had gone and followed him for a short duration. The operator then asked if he was following him and was told he didn't have to do it. And he stopped.
And then had a long conversation with the cop where he described how he didn't see Trayvon anymore.

There was no warning that Zimmerman ignored. The "warning" occured after he led his car not before. And he heeded the warning.

Why do you have to lie?

jr565 said...

"On the night of the shooting Zimmerman left his vehicle to pursue Martin and was carrying a gun, both of which go against neighborhood watch recommendations."

on the night in question Zimmerman was returning from getting groceries and wasnt on duty as a neighborhood watch

jr565 said...

Big mike wrote:
The evidence shows that Martin got to the house where he and his father were staying, but he decided to go back out -- in the rain -- and attack Zimmerman. Martin could have stayed home, and he might still be alive.

that's a great point. Trayvon turned the corner and got away. That's what Zimmerman told cops as he talked to them for more than a minute or two about where he wold met them. Trayvon was home free. Why did he double back, but to confront George?

ed said...

All we need are Milk Bars.

A Clockwork Orange was supposed to be a warning. Not a goal.

Hyphenated American said...

Mike:
"Hyphenated American, my analysis of the mis-proclaimed "reasonable" man is that his objection is to Zimmerman having the temerity to be armed and to use his handgun to save his life."

It's actually far worse than that. Self-professed "reasonable man" objects to the rights of American citizens to walk the streets in the vicinity of suspected thugs. I you think this is impossible, check out the actions of Swedish police, which refuses to stop the Islamists rioting on the streets of Stockholm, while arresting the citizens who decide to defend their streets. This is exactly the thought process of all "reasonable men"

pst314 said...

Has anybody counted the number of lies and distortions so-called "reasonable man" has posted in this thread? It may not be a record but it is large and tells us a lot about his character.

pst314 said...

"it seems to be mainly the white guys on this board that are obsessed with the race aspect of the case."

It takes a lot of nerve for "reasonable troll" to write that: White liberals and black professional race baiters have been screaming "racism!" from the beginning. When whites object, and push back against the lies, creeps like "reasonable man" accuse whites of being obsessed with race.

AReasonableMan said...

pst314 said...
Has anybody counted the number of lies and distortions so-called "reasonable man" has posted in this thread? It may not be a record but it is large and tells us a lot about his character.


This is a little rich given that most people are simply regurgitating verbatim versions of Zimmerman's account of events, when he is a proven liar.

The arresting officers clearly did not believe his account. Somehow the arresting officers, who saw all the physical evidence at the time, were too stupid to simply take the sainted George Zimmerman at his word.

Zimmerman subsequently lied unequivocally to a judge about his finances and passport. He now has limited credibility with both the court and the police. Yet people on this board serve up his nonsense as a gospel truth.

Clearly a lot of people are over-invested in this creep. He is a dumb cowardly thug, with a record, who has a very loose relationship with the truth. He is no poster boy for gun rights, he is a terrible example of what goes wrong when idiots have free access to hand guns. His own stupidity and cowardice led to the outcome that will result in his conviction.

William said...

It's true that neither Zimmerman or Martin are as saintly as their respective supporters claim. If Zimmerman had been less officious or Martin had been less of a jitterbug, there would have been a different outcome. .....I read Bruce Hayden's arguments. He presents the facts and logic of the case in such a way as to convince me of Zimmerman's innocence. He doesn't argue that Zimmerman is a saint. ARM's argument is that Martin is dead and that, therefore, Zimmerman is guilty of murder. The intervening events between Martin's homicide and Zimmerman's surveillance are irrelevant.......I'm certain that I could never convince ARM of the error of his ways. I hope that for the sake of Zimmerman (and justice) that there are more people like me than ARM on the jury. But I wouldn't bet on it.

Hyphenated American said...

One by one....

"The arresting officers clearly did not believe his account. Somehow the arresting officers, who saw all the physical evidence at the time, were too stupid to simply take the sainted George Zimmerman at his word. "


On March 12, 2012, Police Chief Lee turned the investigation over to the State Attorney's office for review.[121] Lee said there was not enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him.

On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state's attorney recommending charges of negligent manslaughter against Zimmerman, though Serino maintains he did not believe they had the evidence to support those charges and that manslaughter was only included in the capias in order for the prosecutor's office to continue with their own investigation.[123][124][125][126] The capias states, "the encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and waited the arrival of law enforcement or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog (sic) in an effort to dispel each party's concern". "There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."[127] The State Attorney's office initially determined there was insufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman and did not file charges based on the capias request.[126][128][129]
On March 16, Serino told the Orlando Sentinel that his investigation had turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman's account, that he had acted in self-defense. "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event, everything I have is adding up to what he says."[130]

Hyphenated American said...

Moreover...


On July 12, interviews conducted by the FBI were publicly released. The Sanford Police Department's lead investigator, Chris Serino, told FBI agents that he believed Zimmerman's actions were not based on Martin's race, but instead on Martin's attire, the circumstances of the encounter, and previous burglaries in the neighborhood. Zimmerman's neighbors and co-workers were interviewed as well. Neighbors who knew Zimmerman had nothing derogatory to say about him and his co-workers were complimentary of him.[139]
Serino also told the FBI that he had felt pressure from three officers within the department to charge Zimmerman although he "did not believe he had enough evidence at the time to file charges", and accused one of these officers of being friendly with Martin's father. He also expressed concern to the FBI about possible leaks of evidence to the media from within the department.[140]

AReasonableMan said...

William said...
ARM's argument is that Martin is dead and that, therefore, Zimmerman is guilty of murder.


No, I said repeatedly that I thought he was guilty of manslaughter. Thanks for the time taken to read my arguments. This was in fact the view of the arresting officer and his staff. In the service of justice I hope there are more people like these police officers and fewer of those who feel the need to defend anyone with a gun, no matter how creepy and unreliable they may be.

Bruce Hayden said...

ARM - I would suggest just the opposite, that you are too invested in the angelic 14 year old Martin, and not the thug that he was rapidly turning into. He is the one whom most here would walk to the other side of the road to avoid. Not because of his skin color, but rather, because of he looked like a gansta wannabe. He was the one talking trash, about hitting people (including, apparently, a bus driver), the fights he had been in, etc., and was practicing MMA. And, the one with a gold grill, w/o any visible means to pay for it, and had been caught with stolen jewelry.

You talk about Zimmerman's record, but it was from maybe a decade earlier. Going from 24 or so to 34, and getting married, does a lot to domesticate many/most males (just look at violent crime statistics by age to see this - it peaks in the early to mid 20s). Some of this is testosterone related, and partly it is because male brains don't finish maturing until their mid 20s, and the last part to mature is judgement. Martin was maybe 6-8 years away from this, and Zimmerman maybe that far beyond it.

Not trying to defend Zimmerman really, because he isn't the brightest bulb. Failed to graduate from junior college because he failed some classes, failed to get into the police academy, etc. He and his wife were less than honest about the money that had been raised for them. His excuse is about as credible as Obama's ignorance about what was going on around him - maybe almost plausible deniabity, but nothing more. And, trying to pull that off with all the lawyers involved was plain dumb, which gets me back to the start of this paragraph.

The thing that you can't get around, when trying to pin this on Zimmerman, and not Martin, is that almost all of the physical evidence supports his story, and not the story that would be necessary to disprove his claim of self-defense. What the jury is going to see are Martin's bruised knuckles, and the gashes on the back of Zimmerman's head, that his clothing showed evidence that he had been on his back on the ground, etc. Single shot from the gun, at close range, into Martin's chest. Recorded call to the dispatcher mostly corroborates Zimmerman's story, and disproves alternate scenarios. Etc.

I still think that it is significant that the prosecutor did not take the case to a grand jury, but instead took it upon herself to indict personally. Not that that is illegal or anything, but rather, possibly indicia that she didn't think that the grand jury would indict, based on the evidence they had.

In any case, I think that you should consider the possibility that Martin was just as he has been portrayed here, an almost adult male rapidly going bad, who physically attacked Zimerman, knocking him down, breaking his nose, and beating his head into the concrete. That that attack was in character with his electronic postings, and was probably done because Zimmerman looked vulnerable and had dis'ed him by maybe questioning why he was there and what he was doing there, skulking around the complex in bad weather etc. That he played dice with Darwin, and lost when Zimmerman turned out to have a gun.

The trial is going to be interesting, and we shall soon see who is more invested in their narrative - you or most of the rest of us here.

Big Mike said...

So in your "reasonable" view it is self-defense = manslaughter? Got it. Disagree with it.

Regard you as utterly worthless for suggesting it.

Hyphenated American said...

"Zimmerman subsequently lied unequivocally to a judge about his finances and passport. He now has limited credibility with both the court and the police. Yet people on this board serve up his nonsense as a gospel truth."

If that is the case, then he will before item for this. Is there an official charge against George Zimmerman? If not, then you have no case.

Hyphenated American said...

"He is a dumb cowardly thug, with a record, who has a very loose relationship with the truth. He is no poster boy for gun rights, he is a terrible example of what goes wrong when idiots have free access to hand guns. His own stupidity and cowardice led to the outcome that will result in his conviction."

You keep calling him a thug, a coward, and an idiot. You refuse to provide any evidence that he was a thug, a coward, or a idiot. As for your claims that he will convicted for manslaughter, they are facing pretty heavy odds.

Hyphenated American said...

RM, do you have any actual evidence to support your claim that Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter? And btw, no one wanted to press charges against him until the media and left-wing extremists intervened. S your theory that the detectives had a strong case against him is baseless.

Hyphenated American said...

"Reasonable man", at what point to plan to,introduce the evidence that Zimmerman did not shoot Martin in self-defense? At this point it looks like its purely a matter,of religious faith to you. If you continue to refuse to provide th evidence, it would be fair to conclude that you hate Zimmerman because he is Hispanic.

AReasonableMan said...

Bruce, you loosely cobble together your own dark fantasies about Martin with some demographic data and take a hard swallow.

The hard facts are that Zimmerman has a record, including domestic violence, is obviously a dim bulb, has an unnatural obsession with law enforcement, has convinced multiple cops and a judge that he is lying, is a physical coward and clearly panicked resulting in the death of a teenager. None of this is in dispute, whereas everything you say about Martin is either projection or based on Zimmerman's highly questionable testimony.

As you say let's see what happens in court, but remember that the jury on Althouse will bear little resemblance to the regular folk on the jury in Florida, who will have some issues with a dim-witted vigilante acting out his dark fantasies of law enforcement in order justify the killing of an unarmed teenager.

Big Mike said...

... whereas everything you say about Martin is either projection or based on Zimmerman's highly questionable testimony.

People are allowed to be dim bulbs, otherwise you'd have been locked away a long time ago.

However "questionable" you, personally, regard Zimmerman's testimony, neither you nor anyone else has been able offer evidence that contradicts it. Far from being "questionable," it appears at this juncture to be the truth. When I challenged you, repeatedly, to produce such evidence all you are capable of doing is making ad hominem attacks on Zimmerman.

Lefties like you keep trying to gin up cases to push the notion that Blacks suffer terribly at the hands of those evil White folks. I think the Trayvon Martin case will join Crystal Mangum and Tawana Brawley in the trash can.

Hyphenated American said...

"Reasonable man", at what point do you plan to introduce the evidence that Zimmerman did not shoot Martin in self-defense? Right now it looks like its purely a matter,of religious faith to you. If you continue to refuse to provide th evidence, it would be fair to conclude that you hate Zimmerman because he is Hispanic.

This is a second call to self-proclaimed "Reasonable Man" to prove his assertions.