HANNITY: Is there anything you regret? Do you regret getting out of the car to follow Trayvon that night?Zimmerman had just described how Martin was beating his head against the concrete — you can see that Hannity was inviting Zimmerman to say: If I had not had the gun, I would have died. In context, you can see Zimmerman brought up God as his way of declining to explore alternate scenarios. Note that he had trouble with Hannity's double-negative question "Do you feel you wouldn't be here for this interview if you didn't have that gun?" Zimmerman answers no, which literally would mean that Zimmerman thinks he would have survived to tell the tale, but, especially given his description of the pre-shooting attack, it seems he would have said that without the gun, he would have died. Hannity rephrases the question: "You feel you would not be here?" And Zimmerman's answer is, essentially, it's not for me to say.
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
HANNITY: Do you regret that you had a gun that night?
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
HANNITY: Do you feel you wouldn't be here for this interview if you didn't have that gun?
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
HANNITY: You feel you would not be here?
ZIMMERMAN: I feel it was all God's plan and for me to second guess it or judge it --
HANNITY: Is there anything you might do differently in retrospect now that the time has passed a little bit?
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
Actually, I think the problem for Zimmerman is less that it sounds like he thought God had a plan for him to kill Martin than that he failed to clearly state that if he hadn't had that gun to shoot Martin, he would have died. But I think the complexity is that in Zimmerman's version of what happened, Martin saw the gun:
ZIMMERMAN: At that point, I realized that it wasn't my gun, it wasn't his gun, it was the gun.So, in the actual story, with the gun, Zimmerman's need to shoot Martin was much greater than it would have been in the alternate scenario with Martin punching him and banging his head on the concrete. Zimmerman declined to comment on the alternate scenario in which there is no gun. His form of expression brought God into the picture. Someone less given to God talk might have said: What happened happened.
HANNITY: Did he say anything? Because you said he was talking a lot about the gun. Did he say he noticed the gun?
ZIMMERMAN: He said, "You are going to die tonight (EXPLETIVE DELETED)" and took one hand off of my mouth and I felt it going down my chest towards my belt and my holster, and that's when I -- I didn't have anymore time.
But now, the "God's plan" line is out there, affecting what people think about Zimmerman, and it will be used against him in his trial. Such are the risks of doing interviews.
Posts
252 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 252 of 252Never got into a fight with somebody I didn't know, nor knew of anybody who'd randomly jump some dude.
You should have gone to my high school. I guarantee you it happens all the time.
Chris Gerrib said...
Jay - there are 1100 units in my complex, flanked by 2 apartment complexes. We do have burglaries. We also have people in hoodies walking down the street
You didn't answer the question.
I'm not really surprised by this.
Except that you don't own any firearms
Please stop bringing your fantasy world to my doorstep. If you want to have a rich fantasy life, fine by me. Just do your best to avoid sharing the fantasies that involve me. Ok?
But anyway, why don't you direct us to the proof that Zimmerman was advised not to carry a gun as you asserted?
Do you think there is a reason why you can't do that?
You know, even for an idiot, Jay seems pretty damn confused. First he announces that I'm lying. Then he demands proof. Don't most semi-rational people demand proof first and make accusations of lying second?
Jay is practicing an art form called argumentum ad ignorantiam. It's Jay's specialty. And when he's informed of his logical fallacies, he likes to use a "surge" of fallacies to overwhelm his opponent with an avalanche of stupidity. Yeah, that's our Jay, the Althouse blog dolt.
Since Jay will squawk about this until he shits himself, I'll provide the evidence to prove Jay doesn't know his head from ass.
From the Neighborhood Watch Guidelines:
Never carries weapons of any kind — e.g. guns, black jack, mace, baseball bat, or knives
And then there's this from the National Neighborhood Watch director:
National Neighborhood Watch director criticizes Zimmerman's actions in Trayvon Martin shooting
It's ironic because 2012 is the 40th anniversary of the Neighborhood Watch program, which was created at the behest of the National Sheriffs' Association in 1972 in response to rising crime. With the Trayvon Martin case becoming huge news and attraction the attention of no less than the FBI, the Justice Department, civil rights groups, and even the President of the United States, attention has been cast upon the Neighborhood Watch program as well.
Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, elaborated on the rules that George Zimmerman broke. First, he approached a suspicious stranger. "If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy [Zimmerman] went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."
Volunteers should resist the urge to intervene, Tutko said, even if they happen to see a crime in progress, because they may become victims themselves. He tells Neighborhood Watch trainees that "you do what you can, when you can, as much as you can, but if you cross the line, everybody loses."
In addition, although Zimmerman broke no laws because he has a concealed weapons permit, it's something that Neighborhood Watch strongly discourages. "There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said. "You do not carry a weapon during neighborhood watch. If you carry a weapon, you're going to pull it."
Zimmerman has claimed self-defense in the matter. He was running an errand in his SUV when he first spotted Trayvon walking back from a 7-Eleven store at about 7:15 p.m. on Feb. 26. While Zimmerman did call police to report Martin as suspicious, he continued to follow the teen, although the dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow Martin.
In summary, Neighborhood Watch advises citizen patrol members not to carry weapons. Zimmerman broke Neighborhood Watch guidelines by carrying a gun.
Prediction: Jay will block this information with his reality denial filter.
WTF do you know about banging heads against concrete? A cousin of mine was killed that way by an enraged asshole.
Sorry to hear about your cousin.
None of the independent evidence, in this case Zimmerman's medical condition after the encounter, suggests that his life was threatened in the brawl. His injuries were minor.
That doesn't mean that Zimmerman didn't fear for his life. Possibly he did. It also doesn't mean that Zimmerman is telling the truth. A lot of people here are reaching a lot of conclusions about events that aren't supported by evidence.
It would be terrific if people would make fact-based statements instead of relying on irrational speculation.
he girlfriend/friend's statement that Martin called out to Zimmerman first shows he engaged first.
So that pretty much kills the scenario pushed by some of the idiots here that Martin jumped Zimmerman from behind in a surprise attack. On the other hand, calling out to someone isn't in anyway pertinent to how the physical confrontation started. Right?
Zimmerman had head trauma and was overpowered and pinned to the ground. His life was in jeopardy.
Yet Zimmerman's injuries are not consistent with a life threatening attack. That doesn't mean that Zimmerman couldn't have considered his life in jeopardy, but there's no physical evidence or independent eyewitness evidence to suggest that Zimmerman's life was in jeopardy.
You taking to the Internet to make shit up about the case is all coincidence!!!
Take it easy on your exclamation point key, little Jay. If this blog is really the most exciting thing in your life, and your stupid accusations deserve 3 exclamation points, then you're a far more pathetic creature than I first imagined.
Put your insta-denial on hold for a minute and think about this: unlike you, most of us can't devote our day to writing comments for the Althouse blog. So repeating your demand for a reply every 3 minutes doesn't impress me, especially if I'm not here to respond to your every wish. Try to connect with reality every now and then. Acting like a spoiled brat cements my impression of you but it doesn't earn you anything worth having.
My suggestion is that you find a rubberband to play with. Doubling down on stupid may be your first, last and only strategy, but it's not working for you. Also, it might be a good idea if you take a few minutes away from this blog every hour or two. Have you ever heard of fresh air and sunshine? Try it, you might enjoy it.
Jake diamond,
Zimmerman wasn't on duty the night he had the altercation with trayvon. So whether or not he should have been carrying a weapon while on neighborhood watch is irrelevant.
And while it's true that his injuries proved non life threatening, that is s judgement that can br made in hindsight not while you're in the middle of a fight. If his story is at all accurate, but for him shooting trayvon and they would have been. How many times must he allow his head to be bashed before treating the incident as one where he is imminent danger?
I've asked 10 times.
Yeah, this is what I mean. You have the patience of a 2 year old child. Get a life, buddy. Stop throwing tantrums and acting like a slow-minded spoiled brat.
I swear your parents must be saints.
So that pretty much kills the scenario pushed by some of the idiots here that Martin jumped Zimmerman from behind in a surprise attack. On the other hand, calling out to someone isn't in anyway pertinent to how the physical confrontation started. Right?
I think the assertion is more that trayvon basically came out of nowhere, engaged him with a "do you have a problem" line and then cold cocked him when he looked down and reached for his phone.
Jake wrote:
Zimmerman has claimed self-defense in the matter. He was running an errand in his SUV when he first spotted Trayvon walking back from a 7-Eleven store at about 7:15 p.m. on Feb. 26. While Zimmerman did call police to report Martin as suspicious, he continued to follow the teen, although the dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow Martin.
This is plainly a false assumption. After he was told he didn't need to keep following, he ceased. How about addressing that reality, rather than continuing peddling the false reality.
In summary, Neighborhood Watch advises citizen patrol members not to carry weapons. Zimmerman broke Neighborhood Watch guidelines by carrying a gun.
As mentioned, he was running an errand, he wasn't acting in the capacity of being on a neighborhood watch. Address that rather than peddle the false reality.
He further says Immermsn erred by confronting ytrayvon, when his story is that he was confronted by trayvon and then cold cocked before having any chance to defuse the situation.
And yet you are the ones arguing things that fly on the face of reality.
Zimmerman wasn't on duty the night he had the altercation with trayvon. So whether or not he should have been carrying a weapon while on neighborhood watch is irrelevant.
This is really a dumb argument and I suspect you know it. Whether or not Zimmerman was "officially on duty" as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer isn't relevant. He was acting as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, he knew the Neighborhood Watch guidelines, and he was breaking those guidelines by following Martin with a weapon.
You aren't a stupid person, so I'm sure you can figure out for yourself why Neighborhood Watch advises against carrying weapons. And generally speaking, the police also advise against Neighborhood Watch volunteers carrying weapons. It's a profoundly stupid thing to do; it's just one of the many examples of Zimmerman's poor judgment.
And while it's true that his injuries proved non life threatening, that is s judgement that can br made in hindsight not while you're in the middle of a fight.
Give me a break. Zimmerman had a gun. It was far more likely that Martin felt that his life was threatened than the other way around.
I've seen tons of bar fights over the years with injuries a helluva lot more serious than the scrapes and bruises Zimmerman picked up. And the guys in these fights don't assume that the fight they're in is life threatening; bar fights rarely ever result in a fatal shooting.
If his story is at all accurate
I rate his credibility as pretty damn low. See the problem?
I think the assertion is more that trayvon basically came out of nowhere, engaged him with a "do you have a problem" line and then cold cocked him when he looked down and reached for his phone.
Is there any independent evidence to support that scenario?
This is plainly a false assumption. After he was told he didn't need to keep following, he ceased. How about addressing that reality, rather than continuing peddling the false reality.
The false assumption is yours. There is no independent evidence to support the claim that Zimmerman stopped following Martin when the dispatcher told him not to follow.
What we do know is this:
Zimmerman followed Martin although Neighborhood Watch guidelines advise volunteers against doing so. Zimmerman carried a weapon as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer even though it violated Neighborhood Watch guidelines.
In important instances, Zimmerman established that he did not follow the advice he was given. That is a key factor in establishing the credibility of any claim that he followed the advise of the dispatcher.
As mentioned, he was running an errand, he wasn't acting in the capacity of being on a neighborhood watch.
I've addressed this already. It's just pathetic to claim that Zimmerman wasn't exercising poor judgment by ignoring Neighborhood Watch guidelines because he wasn't "officially" on volunteer duty when he chose to act in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer.
He further says Immermsn erred by confronting ytrayvon
I don't know what the hell you're referring to here, but isn't your issue with whomever "he" is, rather than with me?
How it started does NOT matter.
Ok. Some idiot raised the subject of "how it started" by proposing a scenario for which there's no independent evidence. So I addressed that. If "how it started" doesn't matter, why did you insert yourself into the discussion with a bunch of irrelevant information? If "how it started doesn't matter," why have you been wasting your time and mine discussing it?
Seriously folks, calm down and be rational. This forum is like a loud party with everyone talking and no one listening. Jay has the attention span of an infant and throws a fit if he doesn't get what he wants, when he wants it (and of course he wants it NOW!!!!!!!).
What exactly is "independent evidence"?
Physical evidence, evidence that can be corroborated, eyewitness accounts in which there's no indication that the witness has a stake in the outcome of the trial.
Zimmerman's account of what happened does not qualify, obviously.
I'm not your Daddy. But I did know your Mother.
You must be a real old fart then since she died in 1954. Or maybe you knew her after that?
@Althouse -
You have a classy bunch here. You must be so pleased.
The physical evidence corroborates Zimmerman's story
Wishful thinking, I'm afraid, but not correct. There are many critical elements of Zimmerman's account that are not corroborated.
Since Zimmerman's credibility isn't great, this creates a problem for his defense.
The idea that inner-city kids don't drop the gloves and go at the drop of a hat is laughable.
Now this is funny. Callahan fancies himself an expert on the behavior of "inner-city kids." Isn't the internet great for producing instant expertise from the unlikeliest of sources?
So the anti-Zimmerman argument really is "Well, of course Zimmerman should have known that a black male teenager would attack someone who inquired into what he was doing"? And that is not outrageously racist because....
Jake:
Sorry, but the forensic evidence support zimmermans story, the etewitness testimony supports it and he even passed a lie detector. What do you have? Raw conjecture
Jake diamond wrote:
The false assumption is yours. There is no independent evidence to support the claim that Zimmerman stopped following Martin when the dispatcher told him not to follow.
listen to the tape again. After a few seconds he no longer sees trayvon. And the conversation then shifts to where to meet the cops. How can you continue following someone if you don't know where they are? And why would he have that entire conversation if he knew where trayvon was.
This is really a dumb argument and I suspect you know it. Whether or not Zimmerman was "officially on duty" as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer isn't relevant. He was acting as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, he knew the Neighborhood Watch guidelines, and he was breaking those guidelines by following Martin with a weapon.
if he's off duty then he is not acting in the capacity as a member of the neighborhood watch. That doesnt mean he can't call the cops. And as a citizen with a legal permit, he is allowed to carry a gun. In fact, it was cops that directed him to get a gun in the first place.
Jake Diamond said...
From the Neighborhood Watch Guidelines:
Um, which neighborhood would this be?
Why don't you provide a link?
"Neighborhood watches are routinely told not to carry guns..."
So? A bad idea is a bad idea, regardless of its fad status.
And that quote from the National Neighborhood Watch director is just despicable. I'll take Sir Robert Peel over that, any day.
Jake Diamond said...
Please stop bringing your fantasy world to my doorstep
Well, Except that you don't own any firearms
Idiot.
Jake Diamond said...
The false assumption is yours. There is no independent evidence to support the claim that Zimmerman stopped following Martin when the dispatcher told him not to follow.
HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA
Um, there is no evidence, anywhere at all, he continued to follow Martin.
The fact you think that is a response speaks volumes about your intellect.
leslyn said...
I see you are trying to herd cats; i.e., encourage people to limit themselves to the known facts, rather than inference, suggestion, assertion, suspicion or speculation.
Note: You have not one utter clue what the facts are regarding this case.
I've addressed this already. It's just pathetic to claim that Zimmerman wasn't exercising poor judgment by ignoring Neighborhood Watch guidelines because he wasn't "officially" on volunteer duty when he chose to act in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer.
Except your stupid repetition which ignores the fact that he wasn't doing neighborhood watch doesn't address anything, imbecile.
Jake Diamond said...
There are many critical elements of Zimmerman's account that are not corroborated.
I bet there are!
And you could totally name them all without lying!
Really, you could!!!
Idiot.
Jake Diamond said...
None of the independent evidence, in this case Zimmerman's medical condition after the encounter, suggests that his life was threatened in the brawl. His injuries were minor.
Except, you're obfuscating, clown.
See, you saying his injuries are minor actually is a meaningless phrase, which is why you're making it.
He had 2 black eyes and a broken nose.
To you, Internet moron, that is "minor"
Of course that fits your idiotic talking points just fine.
Finally, as a matter of law, his injuries are irrelevant.
Which of course is why you keep falsely asserting they were "minor"
Idiot.
Jake Diamond said...
In important instances, Zimmerman established that he did not follow the advice he was given.
Well, except for the fact that for in order for you to conclude this you must assume that the "Neighborhood watch guidelines" apply in all instance of your life and that totally makes a ton of sense. I mean, nobody in a neighborhood watch should ever concealed carry, ever!
Really, it does!!!
Idiot.
Jake Diamond said...
Wishful thinking, I'm afraid, but not correct. There are many critical elements of Zimmerman's account that are not corroborated.
Every bit of available evidence supports Zimmerman's account of the events.
You could not name 3 "critical elements" of Zimmerman's account that are not corroborated without lying.
This is freakin hilarious.
First wittle Jakie asserts:
Zimmerman was carrying a gun even though he'd been advised not to.
Then as "proof" of this "advice" wittle Jakie posts:
There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said. "You do not carry a weapon during neighborhood watch."
Then in the richest bit of irony, wittle Jakie actually says:
It's just pathetic to claim that Zimmerman wasn't exercising poor judgment by ignoring Neighborhood Watch guidelines because he wasn't "officially" on volunteer duty
You really, really can't make this level of stupid up.
leslyn said...
Zimmerman's "God's plan" statement was awful:
No, your interpretation of the statement is awful.
So as we see yet again, in order for wittle jakie's "facts" to be true one must engage in lies, leaps of logic, and obfuscation.
But he's telling the truth to all these Tea Party dummies who don't care about "facts"!
He is!!!
Leslyn wrote:
Is he saying, "God told me I had to shoot him?" No. That would be met with scepticism. So after the fact, it is "God's plan." But that is so unbelievably arrogant, that he reveals himself.
Short form: "I shot Martin, so it was God's plan."
"I am God."
you must be an atheist, since you are SO distorting this. Gods plan means FATE. You know the concept of how god works in mysterious ways, and we as humans often question why things happen. We don't have an answer, bug Thr idea is that it's part of gods plan for us. Zimmerman is not saying HE is god.
And by the way, bad things are part of gods plan too. Why would god allow the holocaust? Because its part of gods plan.
There is actually a song that addresses this sentiment quite well.
Tempted and tried, we’re oft made to wonder
Why it should be thus all the day long;
While there are others living about us,
Never molested, though in the wrong.
Refrain:
Farther along we’ll know more about it,
Farther along we’ll understand why;
Cheer up, my brother, live in the sunshine,
We’ll understand it all by and by.
That's what George is talking about.
What's pretty scary is that this foggy-minded, addle-headed, ignorant twit leslyn is - or claims to be - a law-enforcement officer.
Libtard: There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said. "You do not carry a weapon during neighborhood watch."
In summary, Neighborhood Watch advises citizen patrol members not to carry weapons. Zimmerman broke Neighborhood Watch guidelines by carrying a gun.
Moron. Zimmerman wasn't on patrol duty at the time. He was headed to the store.
ie. you don't have the first clue what you are talking about. You keep making these mornic mistakes because you haven't even studied the case.
Libtard: Yet Zimmerman's injuries are not consistent with a life threatening attack.
The standard for use of lethal force in self-defense is:
"a person is justified in using deadly force (and does not have a duty to retreat) if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another"
ie., you're a sophist flailing away at his own strawman.
but there's no physical evidence or independent eyewitness evidence to suggest that Zimmerman's life was in jeopardy.
Both the wounds and eye-witness testimony prove that Zimmerman's head was being repeatedly bashed against the concrete. Such attacks often cause death or Traumatic Brain Injury.
Its the only thing that explains the break in your pattern.
If you remember, Tradguy drooled all over the Wise Latina.
Maybe it was-'t--but through free will and sin, one after another turned away from doing anything to stop it. Would that be God's "plan" for us: to refuse to have our salvation worked out in us?
What about the resistance, the attempts against Hitler's life, those who hid, transported, fed and saved the Jews and other "undesirable?" Was that working against God's plan?
Z has no right to take a life and then claim that is "God's plan." Z makes himself God.
We are not going to get what god's plan is so long as we're living on the earth. TO put it in plain words, zimmerman is saying, it happened the way it happened, the way it was meant to happen (both good and bad) and was, he believes fated and preordained. He feels he was in the right in defending himself, but also feels terrible that it led to the death of Trayvon, for what was essentially a misunderstanding on both their parts. But how can you second guess fate? That's what he's talking about. Get off the literal interpretation of words, since you can't understand what he means. He's not saying God is on his side and therefore Trayvon had to die.
Jake Diamond said...
But given the facts that are established by independent evidence, we know that
Zimmerman followed Martin, even though he'd been advised not to.
Er, there is no independent evidence to support the claim that Zimmerman followed Martin when the dispatcher told him we don't need you to do that.
Thanks for participating.
I've read through most of the comments. With sufficient imagination and intelligence, one can write a plausible scenario which shows that Zimmerman was at fault. But can the writer of such a scenario really claim that plausible scenario proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?......When Zimmerman spoke of "God's plan", I think he was trying to come to terms with a malign fate. His life is in the crapper, and likely it will remain that way for the rest of his life. Even with acquittal--especially with acquittal--he's got to worry about some random thug taking a poke or a shot at him. And that story about him being a child molestor will follow him to the grave. After legal fees, he might end up with a few bucks from his defense fund, but that's no recompense for his travails. If Zimmeran can align his fate with a benign God, his faith should be celebrated.
All of this nonsense about Zimmerman following Martin. If you think that's a good argument for Zimmerman's fault, ignoring the error of fact, look at what you're writing. You're arguing that attacking the other person is a normal response to being followed and asked what one is doing. Would you ever argue such a thing about a white person?
You know, it's a funny thing--when it's not my case and I don't have all the facts because they haven't been presented yet, I prefer to let a jury speak.
If you don't have an affirmative case to convict Zim that fully overcomes the assertion of self-defense, then this shouldn't even go to a jury.
You're a threat to civil liberties, if you think otherwise. That's the kind of thinking that enabled Brad Nifong.
Jake Diamond wrote:
Jake Diamond said...
But given the facts that are established by independent evidence, we know that
Zimmerman followed Martin, even though he'd been advised not to.
No that is not the case. He started following Trayvon after being asked which way he was going. THen like 6 seconds later, the dispatcher asked. Are you following him, and he says Yes, and the dispatcher says "You don't have to do that". THen Zimmerman says OK.
THere is then another minute and a half where Zimmerman says "he ran" and then not only is Zimmerman not following him, but he has no idea where he is. He even says on the tape he doesn't want to give out personal info, since he doesn't know where TRayvon is. Meaning, he WAS NOT FOLLOWING HIM. You can't follow someone if you don't know where they are! Over, and over, the people arguing that Zimmerman was told not to follow and he continued, are continuing to lie despite the 911 tape CLEARLY showing the opposite.
Why do you think you have to continue this misstatement in order to make your case? Don't you think it in fact suggests more that you are a LIAR than that Zimmerman is guilty?
And he was told "you don't have to do that", he wasn't told "Don't do that". So even if he did continue to follow Trayvon, it may be stupid, but there's nothing criminal about it. But, he didn't SO STOP SAYING HE DID.
Here's the tape so that you can listen for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgR7gCxXQYg
Also, for Chris Gerrib,
you might want to read up on Zimmerman to see why some guy like Trayvon might arouse suspicion to George and others in the gated community. Namely, there had been a bunch of robberies in the community, some of which Zimmerman was directly involved with.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425
It shows the history of the neighborhood and why Zimmerman was on the neighborhood watch to begin with.
By the summer of 2011, Twin Lakes was experiencing a rash of burglaries and break-ins. Previously a family-friendly, first-time homeowner community, it was devastated by the recession that hit the Florida housing market, and transient renters began to occupy some of the 263 town houses in the complex. Vandalism and occasional drug activity were reported, and home values plunged. One resident who bought his home in 2006 for $250,000 said it was worth $80,000 today.
At least eight burglaries were reported within Twin Lakes in the 14 months prior to the Trayvon Martin shooting, according to the Sanford Police Department. Yet in a series of interviews, Twin Lakes residents said dozens of reports of attempted break-ins and would-be burglars casing homes had created an atmosphere of growing fear in the neighborhood.
Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.
"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."
Now, take a Trayvon, He's not known to the community. He's walking around looking stoned after hours inside a gated community, and he's looking in the windows of houses as if he's casing them.Considering the VERY recent history of multiple robberies in the community, all of which were committed by black youths, and considering again Tryavon was not known by anyone in that community, can you not see why Zimmerman might be suspicious of him? In hindsight, he's related to someone who is dating someone who lives there, but noone knows that. I don't see why it would be remotely unrealistic to assume that Trayvon was yet another one of those youths robbing the neighborhood. You would have to be a slave to political correctism to assume that somehow his actions shouldn't even trigger suspicion.
that was in answer to Chris Gerrib's question - what's suspicious about walking in a cold rain with your hands in your pockets? "
Now you know Chris. Perhaps you should stop arguing abstractions that have no basis in the reality of that community.
The prosecution does not have an affirmative case against Zimmerman to support 2nd Degree murder that even remotely addresses the self-defense assertion.
The process should have been "truncated" long ago.
If you think "due process" includes prosecuting ANYWAY, then you wouldn't recognize due process if it bit you on the ass.
Good lord, I hope you're not a cop in my community. But most of them aren't as dumb as you.
"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."
The 911 tapes prove that Zimmerman was uncertain of the Martin's race. He couldn't tell if he was black.
You stupid racemongering Ape.
Post a Comment