How is it that a teenager doing nothing but walking home from the store is now implied to be the

[HiPointDem]

cause of his own death?

All you trolls think you're fooling people. You're not.

Sickening.

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. Zimbo should at least have been wearing his badge

So that there would be no doubt what kind of treatment anyone he meets could expect.

[HiPointDem]

2. he should carve it in his forehead like charles manson

[Orrex]

11. Perhaps he could be branded with an M instead

[FBaggins]

3. How exactly is it that you know that's what he was doing?

And no... that isn't what people are saying.

[Hissyspit]

7. Why do we need to know that?

There is apparently no way to know that, and he is innocent until proven guilty, and he can't tell us what he was doing because he is dead, and there still is NO particular reason to believe otherwise.

[FBaggins]

15. We don't

There's just no reason to pretend that we do.

[Hissyspit]

19. Until we know otherwise (which apparently we won't ever)

then you can assume that that was what he was doing.

Unless innocent until proven guilty means shit to you.

[Honeycombe8]

31. Both TM and GZ were and are innocent until proven guilty. There is a saying....

something like....

Our justice system is terrible....except for all the others in the world.

No justice system is perfect. But a jury of peers seems to work better than most. These jurors did seem to go through the evidence. What they had to decide was very narrow, compared to all the other issues being talked about the public and media. I said from the start that no matter what decision they made, they were going to be very unpopular. Once a case hits star status, it's too many people demanding particular verdicts, for their own purposes, whether the evidence takes you there or not.

[Hissyspit]

34. That has nothing to do with what I was arguing with the poster about.

[7962]

56. Good answer, Honeycombe

I said in other threads, regardless of what anyone thought, if you watched the trial and saw the evidence, the state didnt prove guilt. I, for one, think that this case should have never gotten the attention it did. Zimmerman didnt "win", his life will never be normal, but he does get to live it.

[Rex]

85. Martin is dead, he is not innocent or guilty.

He is dead from a gunshot to the heart. So it really has nothing to do with the OP.

[FBaggins]

33. Apparently it means something new

I'm not accusing him of anything... let alone charging him with a crime.

You don't have to be a good person to be the victim of a crime... and we don't need to assume that he ess 100 percent pure in order to disagree with GZ's behavior.

For all we know... he was up to something. That's no excuse to do anything but call the cops.

[Hissyspit]

35. "For all we know... he was up to something."

Yeah, and for all we know, he wasn't.

[FBaggins]

39. Exactly

It isn't relevant to the trial... Which is why TM's prior challenges with authority should not be admissable.

[Hissyspit]

41. Who said anything about the trial?

[FBaggins]

50. You did

since the criminal process is the only place where "innocent until proven guilty" applies.

[Hissyspit]

51. No, it also applies in people's BRAINS.

[FBaggins]

53. Nope

No such standard exists.

Think back to when you first read of the event. Are you sure that your brain fit this model?

[Honeycombe8]

42. Well, we do know what was going on at and immediately before the shooting, don't we?

The physical evidence and eyewitness testimony tells a story. The prosecutor all but conceded that story during his closing argument. It was pretty strong evidence. But there are some who don't want to see the evidence, and there are others who would have rejected the evidence, which juries can do. This jury went where the evidence took 'em.

Maybe should've included a criminal negligence or something charge. Something easier to slap GZ with without heavy duty prison time, since the jury didn't see GZ's actions that way. He was in a pickle at the time of the shooting, but whether he had another course of action open to him....I wonder about that. I question the shooting course of action. How about shooting in the air as a warning? GZ couldn't get a punch in to TM? I wonder.

[Humanist_Activist]

48. All I see is evidence of a kid trying to defend himself and failing...

most likely Zimmerman reached to grab Martin, Martin resisted, Zimmerman fell, and then, before you know it, Martin is dead with a bullet hole in his chest. Frankly I don't see where the fuck Zimmerman gets off on fucking self defense, if there is justice in the world, he would have been the one laying dead in the grass.

[Hissyspit]

49. What?

What do we know for sure that tells us that Trayvon was not just a kid walking home from the store?

[TNNurse]

9. Did he approach Zimmerman's truck? Did he??

As far as I am concerned according to this law, the truck was Zimmerman's "ground" and he should have stayed in it. Is there evidence that ANYONE was in imminent danger from Martin? Then there was no reason for ANYONE to intervene.

[Punkingal]

28. YES!!

He got out of the truck! That is the reason for this tragedy...he didn't stay in his truck.

[world wide wally]

37. Now the streets of Florida are safe from Skittles spills. God bless America!

[mike dub]

58. This is what I'd been thinking too, TNNurse

Actually, "Castle Doctrine" came to mind, too. If I were driving down my road and saw a person walking whom I thought was a true threat (and/or I were a paranoid coward like GZ), I would remain in my vehicle (in my state, North Carolina, your vehicle is an extension of your castle/or your Home / same as in FL.) and call the law.

Same argument (at least in NC/which is less wild-west than FL) that, if someone's in your front yard, whom you think is a threat, you keep your front door closed and locked, call the law and they can check it out. I would never open the door (or step out of my safety/vehicle) to confront a person who's actually a potential threat. GZ was spoiling for a confrontation, by leaving his vehicle, with a handgun.

BTW, in NC and FL, if the person in your front yard then busts through the front door, a gun owner or non gun owner may then use lethal force, as that person is now a direct physical threat to the homeowner and their family. Burden of self-defense goes way down once someone enters Your safe area in NC and FL --- I mean, the burden for acquital in the case of Castle Doctrine (threat breaches your castle) is even lower than the GZ/TM/ outside on a common street/self-defense joke-justice that failed Trayvon in this case.

And FWIW, I'm white and many folks of Trayvon's ethnicity walk up and down my country road time to time, and I'm not paranoid of them like GZ was--- and he's in a suburbified, gated community for crying out loud. GZ's a maaaajor bigot and coward.

[Orrex]

12. What do you think he was doing?

Aside from getting murdered, I mean.

[FBaggins]

16. Obviously I have no idea

I would have been suspicious... but that would be no excuse to follow him (let alone with a gun)

[Orrex]

20. Why would you have been suspicious?

[FBaggins]

29. Because they had several recent breakins

many that were associated with teens out at night looking at houses.

Note that this means a call to authorities and the expectation that must of the time it would be nothing at all.

[Orrex]

32. So even though you say you "obviously" have no idea what he was doing...

You would have been suspicious of him.


Do you go through your day to day life like that? What a fearful existence you endure.

[FBaggins]

38. Again... does the word mean something new today?

My neighborhood had only had one break-in in the decade I've lived here. So I wouldn't suspect anything.

If my neighborhood had called the police HUNDREDS of times in the last year... I would be suspicious of any teen out alone at night in the rain.

But "suspicious" is very different from hire you seem to be reading it.

[Orrex]

46. It means that you're arguing in favor of profiling

Your declared suspicion implies that you question the legitimacy of the person's presence or actions on the scene, and it is reasonable to wonder why you feel that way.

If the person were skulking around on private property, your declared suspicion might be justified. But if he's on public property, then your suspicion is your problem, not his.

[FBaggins]

52. Nope

Nothing I've said has anything at all to do with his race.

Behavior is something different... as are the context of what's going on in the neighborhood.

[Orrex]

57. I didn't mention his race either.

You're arguing that a teen on public property is inherently suspicious. That's profiling.

[FBaggins]

62. Again... Nope

We don't know where he was standing ourvwhat he was doing. Nor is "standing on public property" what was reported. It was wandering around at night in the rain looking at people's houses.

Just a couple weeks earlier there was a teen reported for doing just that. A teen that got away before the police arrived. A teen that later did break into a home and was later arrested with the merchandise that was stolen.

[Orrex]

64. Reported by whom? Zimmerman? Sorry, but that's hearsay

Martin was not and is not on trial, so speculation about what he was doing when Zimmerman confronted him is exactly that. Absent some evidence showing that Martin was behaving in a suspicious manner, he had every right to be there.

[FBaggins]

74. Well... no. That word means something too.

Hearsay would be if I said that he said something and I heard it. Since there's a recording of it, it isn't hearsay.

And since the call preceded any of the violence... it's pretty reasonable to accept that part. I'm sure that there are some who will say that GZ just saw a black kid calmly walking down the street and decided to kill him... so he needed to set the stage for his self defense claim, but that's pretty far fetched.

Martin was not and is not on trial, so speculation about what he was doing when Zimmerman confronted him is exactly that.

Of course. Have you not noticed great mounds of speculation on all sides? That's what the OP itself is... the assumption that we know what one person was doing and then asking a question predicated on that assumption as fact.

[Orrex]

75. Hearsay is unverified information

Whether or not it's a recorded statement is irrelevant; it was a statement that Zimmerman made with no corroboration. He wasn't under oath at the time, so even if it were admitted as evidence, it would be nothing more than his statement, i.e., hearsay.

I'm sure that there are some who will say that GZ just saw a black kid calmly walking down the street and decided to kill him... so he needed to set the stage for his self defense claim, but that's pretty far fetched.

I have seen no one on DU make that claim, so that's an irrelevant straw man.

Instead, it appears that Zimmerman chose to initiate a confrontation with a person who had every right to be at that location, even though Zimmerman was instructed not to confront him. There is no verified evidence that Martin was doing anything more suspicious than walking in a public area.


Why are you so motivated to establish Martin's culpability in this?

[FBaggins]

76. Nope.

Hearsay is a claim on my part (in this case) that someone else said something (get it? "hear"... "say" ?). And not all hearsay is inadmissible as evidence... let along in debate. But that again is another discussion. Obviously, anything GZ said on tape can't be hearsay. GZ's statements to police re: what TM said to him are hearsay (despite being recorded) and could not be presented as evidence.

it was a statement that Zimmerman made with no corroboration

Yep. It's what he "reported" to 911. It's the only evidence apart from the call to the girlfriend as to what he was doing at the time. As a point of reference, the GF's claims re: what TM said are hearsay, but are not always inadmissible (since the speaker is dead).

I have seen no one on DU make that claim, so that's an irrelevant straw man.

Then you haven't paid attention... but again, that's irrelevant.

Instead, it appears that Zimmerman chose to initiate a confrontation with a person who had every right to be at that location, even though Zimmerman was instructed not to confront him.

Close. It appears that he intended to initial a confrontation with someone who may or may not have had a right to be doing what he was doing (which doesn't give GZ the right to accost him), and GZ was not "instructed not to confront him"... he was told "we don't need you to do that" when he replied that he had gotten out of the car.

Why are you so motivated to establish Martin's culpability in this?

If the situation weren't so tragic, it would be hilarious that you think that's what I'm doing. As I've said multiple times... you don't need to be a good guy to be the victim of a crime. I don't need to assume that TM was a little angel who never harmed a fly in order to say that GZ was acting as a vigilante. For some reason... others feel a need to paint him as such in order to say that GZ was out of line.

He doesn't strike me as a role model for other kids... anything but. And I have no faith that he was just minding his own business. But none of that means that GZ was justified in his actions.

[Orrex]

79. Nope

someone who may or may not have had a right to be doing what he was doing

That describes every single person in the world at every single moment of every single day; therefore it's meaningless.

(which doesn't give GZ the right to accost him), and GZ was not "instructed not to confront him"... he was told "we don't need you to do that" when he replied that he had gotten out of the car.

I concede this point, as I had misunderstood what the dispatcher told Zimmerman.

He doesn't strike me as a role model for other kids... anything but. And I have no faith that he was just minding his own business.

First of all, so what if he wasn't a role model for other kids? Why is that even worth mentioning, except to impugn him after his death? That's simply blaiming the victim, even though you claim (and will probably claim again) that it's not.

And your statements of faith are of no interest to me.

[FBaggins]

80. Reply

That describes every single person in the world at every single moment of every single day; therefore it's meaningless.

The first statement (taken at arm's length) is correct. The second does not follow. But that was one point of my initial reply. There are things that we don't know. There's no point in making them up in order to make a point, because all that really does it imply that our point is not valid (that we have to make things up).

First of all, so what if he wasn't a role model for other kids? Why is that even worth mentioning, except to impugn him after his death?

To again make the point that we don't have to imagine some perfect angel in order to believe that GZ was wrong to behave as he did. A woman who accuses a man of rape if no less to be defended if we find out that she's a prostitute. Vigilantes sometimes go after actual criminals... but it doesn't make them less of a vigilante.

That's simply blaming the victim

It really isn't (regardless of your expectation that I would say that). It's the opposing position to the ongoing implication that TM needs to be a little angel in order to worthy of being safe from vigilantism.

[Orrex]

81. Hmm...

That describes every single person in the world at every single moment of every single day; therefore it's meaningless.

My point was that a generic statement that applies equally to any random individual has no distinct value in regard to any specific person. It would like saying "the number of goals scored in the game is at least zero." Technically correct, but useless as a descriptor.

I see what you're getting at re: Martin not being an angel and Zimmerman still being wrong, but your approach strikes me as counter-productive. You spent a number of posts arguing why it was reasonable to suspect Martin of something, thereafter arguing that Zimmerman was still wrong to kill him. While that's true, I don't see the value in impugning Martin with such conjecture. You might as well say "Mr Smith was wrong to rape Ms Jones, but let's not forget that she's a prostitute." Even if it's not blaming the victim, it's still maligning the victim for no good reason.

I imagine that you see it differently, or else you wouldn't have asserted it that way.

[EC]

36. So why wouldn't Trayvon not be concerned that

Zimmy may have been the one that was burglarizing houses, since he too was "sneaking around" once he got out of his truck? And who's to say he wasn't casing the block from his truck? Trayvon didn't know him and Zimmy never Id'd himself as neighborhood watch. And that excuse doesn't hold since the thieves had already been arrested by that time and Zimmy knew it.


Oh and by the way..does that mean that only black kids should be suspect? I caught a redheaded white boy crawling into a neighbors window once...There were black families living in that community, so why was he "suspicious" to begin with?

[FBaggins]

45. Who says he wasn't?

Maybe GZ was using the community watch as a cover for his own crimes. Maybe TM caught him and GZ shot him to avoid being exposed.

Oh and by the way..does that mean that only black kids should be suspect?

Of course not. Nor GZ for being Hispanic

[ET Awful]

54. For your post to make sense, Zimmerman would have had to know everybody that lived in the

neighborhood. Otherwise you can't say "a person . . . that doesn't live there." There's no way to know that. To use "black male" as criteria, would only be viable if no black people lived in the neighborhood.

Absent that, it's profiling.

[arcane1]

70. Please, tell me how Martin would have known that Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch

[polly7]

72. Can you explain how he did not fit the demographics,

what was it about him for you that made him stand out? You're doing some ugly profiling yourself here, imo.

[Chisox08]

65. There are white people in Englewood all the time and no one follows them

and kills them.

[City Lights]

21. You have no idea what he was doing yet you would have been suspicious.

Very telling post. Thank you for putting that in the record.

[FBaggins]

30. Is the word new to you?

Do we need to go over the difference between suspicion and the unwarranted certainty that GZ apparently had?

What exactly it's it that you think a community watch does?

[Humanist_Activist]

26. Why would you have been suspicious? n/t

[SoCalDem]

82. He was doing what almost EVERYONE these days, does..

He was walking and talking on his phone...and was at first probably oblivious to even being followed.. When he realized it, he just kept on talking because he did not have fear UNTIL the guy started approaching him..

Imagine you are in a place you do not know well, and some "crazy-ass cracker" who outweighs you by 50lbs, and who IS carrying something..and they are approaching you..

humans are automatically equipped with "fight/flight" reflexes.. he used BOTH to get away from zimmerman..but then zimmerman had a gun..

[HiPointDem]

4. oh, 'ignore' is here. just go the hell away.

[FBaggins]

5. Childish

[99Forever]

17. Yes you are.

Yet, they don't kick your ass out.

Curious, that.

[FBaggins]

22. "I know you are but what am I?"

What a fitting defense of "la la la.... I'm not listening!"

[99Forever]

25. At precisely your level.

[Blackford]

6. Only in America does a dead black boy have to defend himself in his own murder trial n/t

[gollygee]

10. +1

[RC]

67. +10

Justice was not served here. Someone gets out of their vehicle, chases someone else down and accosts them. An altercation results. The accoster then shoots and kills the person he followed and accosted. In most states this would be murder, or at the very least, man slaughter.
The crime? A Black, 17 year old boy, walking back to where he was staying, in a gated community, at night, with his hood up because it was raining. A Black person in a gated community? Heaven forbid that ever happening. But for that he deserved to die? I don't think so.
How could this be self defense on the part of Zimmerman, when his actions say he was instrumental in causing the altercation that evening? This is closer to stalking, or even hunting on the part of Zimmerman, neighborhood watch or not.
In how many other states could this happen and end in a not guilty verdict for the perpetrator? Please tell me, not many, or better yet, none at all.

[KurtNYC]

83. and this jury gave Trayvon Martin the death penalty

[RandiFan1290]

8. Remember to teach the kids!

You must submit to strange men in the night!

[cali]

13. I hope you don't mind.

I wanted to post this Guardian article but I didn't want to start another thread on Trayvon.

And anyone who thinks Trayvon caused his own death? Despicable. He was a kid walking home with candy and soda.

Trayvon Martin so nearly went to his grave unnoticed, his death barely recorded among the grim statistics of gun violence involving African American youths. Initially, after the 17-year-old was killed on 26 February 2012, as he was walking unarmed on a side street in a gated community in Sanford, central Florida, the incident attracted virtually no attention outside the local press.

But the determination of his parents, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, combined with the amplifying echo-chamber of social media, turned an hitherto unnoted death into a cause célèbre. Their call for the man who shot their son with a 9mm pistol, the then 28-year-old neighbourhood watch captain George Zimmerman, to be held accountable transformed the shooting into a litmus test of justice in America today. It put the country's proliferating "stand your ground" gun laws, racial profiling and discrimination against black young men – as well as police incompetence – in the dock.

<snip>

When the case came to trial, Zimmerman's defence team mounted a conventional argument of self defence and did not rely on the stand-your-ground provision in Florida law. But the shooting drew national attention to a plethora of such laws that have expanded the power of gun owners by extending their right not to retreat from a threat out of their homes and into public places. More than 20 states had adopted such laws, Florida among the first and most enthusiastically.

A Tampa Bay Times investigation found that of 200 cases in which Florida's stand your ground law was invoked, almost 70% of the accused had gone free. The accused were much more likely to face no penalty if a black person had been killed (73%) than if a white person had been killed (59%).

<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/14/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-trial

[fasttense]

14. Welcome to the new age Jim Crow

"The accused were much more likely to face no penalty if a black person had been killed (73%) than if a white person had been killed (59%)."

[7962]

61. Thats not really a large difference, 14%

In the "bad old days" I imagine the numbers wouldve been closer to 97 and 3! Or worse.

[niyad]

47. good article, except that gz was NOT a neighborhood watch captain.

[invrabbit]

18. New threat?

now, a stalker can stalk a woman and if she fights back, can he kill her in self-defense?

[City Lights]

24. It appears so, doesn't it?

Welcome to DU, invrabbit.

[Siwsan]

23. I live in a neighborhood full of kids like Trayvon

It is a middle class, very ethnically diverse subdivision, outside of the city of Flint. Kids of all ages are out, day and night. When it's cold, they're wearing hooded sweatshirts. And, when they are wearing hooded sweatshirts, I have no clue as to their race, gender, or if they actually are the neighbor kids. I just know they are kids, walking down the street and I smile and wave.

We actually had an opposite incident where the kids were white and were involved in vandalism. Our neighborhood watch guy, whose house was being vandalized and who happened to be African American, was armed. He chased the kids until he saw which house they ducked into, and the police were called. Ironically they were called by the kid's parents, before the NHW could get to a phone. The kids ended up being charged, and things got MUCH more peaceful, in the neighborhood.

The neighborhood watch guy kept his cool, and did only as much as he needed.

[Joey Liberal]

27. Should have been a manslaughter conviction

Just shows that we are a banana republic.

That jury should be ashamed.

Look for them to be hailed as heroes by Faux News, Rush Limbaugh and the KKK.

[Deep13]

40. White society implicitly believes...

...that black people are a criminal class and are to be treated with suspicion.

[Duckwraps]

43. Oh horse poop! All of "White society?" nt

[Deep13]

60. Yes.

Even if we do not believe it rationally, there is something in--let's say nearly all--American whites that makes us what to cross the street when we see black men approaching. That's why there is a gun culture. That's why cops are far more likely to find a reason to pull over a car with blacks or Hispanics in it than whites. That's why there are so many blacks and Hispanics in prison and on death row in proportion to the population than whites. Racism is not incidental to this country. Rather, whatever pretty words TJ wrote, this country's establishment is rooting in racism as manifested by slavery--driving westward expansion--and the genocide of Natives Americans.

[7962]

63. More blacks are in jail because of stupid, worthless drug laws, IMO.

But even if we dont like it, half the violent crime is committed by african americans, while they only make up 13% of the population.

We need, as a country, to demand a change to laws that throw a man in jail because he had a bag of pot. Meanwhile, a violent criminal will be set free to "make room" for him. Stupid.

[Duckwraps]

68. +1000 nt

[Deep13]

69. I don't know that those figures are true, even if you did get them from FBI.

Selective arrest and prosecution is a pretty clearly exigent phenomenon. So are drug laws that are selectively applied against minorities. To the extent that black persons are more likely to be more violent than whites, I have to wonder how much of that violence is a result of a previous stay in prison.

[7962]

77. It is very hard to get a job with a prison record

Changing the drug laws would keep a LOT of people out of jail and more likely employed. But even if one feels put upon because of an unjust jail stay, it doesnt excuse violent acts. And I dont think blacks are more violent than whites or any other race. I agree about the selective prosecution on drug crimes too. But I dont think the violent crime stats are a reflection of selective prosecution. There are several reputable sites where you can check the figures to confirm.

[Duckwraps]

66. Please don't hang your own prejudicial guilt on other people you don't even know. nt

[Deep13]

71. I grew up thinking MLK was about the greatest person who had ever lived.

I wrote a LTTE about him when I was in high school, which the paper printed without editing. In 1988, I pissed off most of the other MA Dems I knew by siding with Jesse Jackson in the primary over our Gov. Dukakis. I continued on to be a charter member of the Rainbow Coalition for central MA. In short, I hated and still hate racism. It disgusts me how many of my (peripheral) friends and close relatives have become overt bigots since Obama became POTUS. As a lawyer including 8 years prosecuting, I observed the discrimination of the process first hand. Add to that an academic education that has stripped the vernier of lofty motives from this country's history.

So, if I can still harbor lingering racist feelings despite my best intentions, so can you. And so can white America generally. So spare me your unconvincing protests.

[Duckwraps]

78. Yes I completly understand. Still, please don't project your feelings onto others though,

it is, IMO, unhealthy and unhelpful to do so.

[Deep13]

84. If I listened to you...

...I would have to abandon the field of history because I would never be able to draw conclusions about cultural norms, motives for actions, or power relationships generally. Sorry, but the feelings of a person or a community can be ascertained by examining the evidence. So I will have to decline to comply with your admonition.

[ctsnowman]

55. K & R

[Shankapotomus]

73. I know

And he just attacked Zimmerman for absolutely no reason? Right.

[tblue37]

86. Perhaps the most EXTREME form of

victim-blaming I have ever seen!

[ananda]

87. There's a relentless propaganda machine at work over this.

It's managed to pretzelize the whole incident into a lie so twisted
that many people now believe it to be the truth.