Trayvon Martin

[mackenzie]

That's the verdict of people who have also not paid much attention to the trial.

I've not paid much attention to the trial I admit. However, one thing seems resoundingly clear; that if Zimmerman had not been so vigilante in going after this lad then the lad would still be alive.

if martin was right or wrong following the kid is not relevant in terms of convicting him of murder though is it

Not in the legal nicieties of it, no.
Doesn't alter the fact that he probably provoked a situation that would not have happened if the kid had looked like a nice middle class white college boy though does it?

 

[ElanJo]

Not paid much attention to this trial.

Is it basically a Mexican Vigilante who was sick of crime in his area, assuming that a black kid in a hoodie automatically makes him a thief?

So he then apprehends him, ends up getting a beating and shooting the kid in revenge?

That's the verdict of people who have also not paid much attention to the trial.

I've not paid much attention to the trial I admit. However, one thing seems resoundingly clear; that if Zimmerman had not been so vigilante in going after this lad then the lad would still be alive.

What actions exactly justify the use of "vigilante"? I'm not arguing either way, I don't think it's even relevant as to whether he was justified in using deadly force, but one action that kind of goes against the impression that he was a vigilante is the fact that he called the police.

On the flip side, we could say Trayvon would be alive had he continued to go home when he ran off. He had 4 minutes to walk, nevermind run, approximately 300ft. But, again, even if Trayvon walked or ran back upo to the T section it has little bearing on whether Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, which is what the trial was about.

 

[mackenzie]

That's the verdict of people who have also not paid much attention to the trial.

I've not paid much attention to the trial I admit. However, one thing seems resoundingly clear; that if Zimmerman had not been so vigilante in going after this lad then the lad would still be alive.

What actions exactly justify the use of "vigilante"? I'm not arguing either way, I don't think it's even relevant as to whether he was justified in using deadly force, but one action that kind of goes against the impression that he was a vigilante is the fact that he called the police.

On the flip side, we could say Trayvon would be alive had he continued to go home when he ran off. He had 4 minutes to walk, nevermind run, approximately 300ft. But, again, even if Trayvon walked or ran back upo to the T section it has little bearing on whether Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, which is what the trial was about.

Nothing, in my mind anyway, justifies a vigilante.
As for the rest of your post EJ it just seems that would have expected Trayvon to be more accountable for his actions than Zimmerman. And that to me is just so wrong on several levels.
So Trayvon was the manufacturer of his own demise??

 

[hilts]

I've not paid much attention to the trial I admit. However, one thing seems resoundingly clear; that if Zimmerman had not been so vigilante in going after this lad then the lad would still be alive.

if martin was right or wrong following the kid is not relevant in terms of convicting him of murder though is it

Not in the legal nicieties of it, no.
Doesn't alter the fact that he probably provoked a situation that would not have happened if the kid had looked like a nice middle class white college boy though does it?

so what are you saying then he should have been sentenced because people have the opinion he stereotyped the lad? the legal niceties are everything when sending someone to trial

the police said there was not enough evidence to prove he didn't act in self defence, politically pressure was put on to charge him, it went to court and based on evidence or lack of he was cleared, what else could they do?

As usual america's gun laws are to blame for Zimmerman's freedom, something they are unwilling to rectify

the key element to the case is the point where he decided to follow martin and the point at which he was shot, nobody knows what happened in between and one poor sod can't give his account

unlike some i can't say Zimmerman followed this lad because he was black, only Zimmerman knows the answer to this, if you look at the history of crime within that gated community it is feasible that he would have followed any bloke on his own who he didn't recognise

 

[taconinja]

Words fail...

You're welcome to present a cogent counter-argument. I'll wait.

And most of the protesting seems to be of a non-violent nature. I'm sure that's quite disappointing to some.

Well, "When asked why Mr. Martin looked suspicious, his response was because he was Black." is not true.

Fair point. That's my interpretation of (and I'm paraphrasing for the pedantic) "He looked suspicious because he was walking in the rain." He's a racist. He murdered a kid. That's the long and short of it. Was he found not guilty? Yes. I'm not a court of law, though. I can think whatever I judge to be reasonable. He's a piece of trash.

 

[mackenzie]

if martin was right or wrong following the kid is not relevant in terms of convicting him of murder though is it

Not in the legal nicieties of it, no.
Doesn't alter the fact that he probably provoked a situation that would not have happened if the kid had looked like a nice middle class white college boy though does it?

so what are you saying then he should have been sentenced because people have the opinion he stereotyped the lad? the legal niceties are everything when sending someone to trial

the police said there was not enough evidence to prove he didn't act in self defence, politically pressure was put on to charge him, it went to court and based on evidence or lack of he was cleared, what else could they do?

As usual america's gun laws are to blame for Zimmerman's freedom, something they are unwilling to rectify

the key element to the case is the point where he decided to follow martin and the point at which he was shot, nobody knows what happened in between and one poor sod can't give his account

unlike some i can't say Zimmerman followed this lad because he was black, only Zimmerman knows the answer to this, if you look at the history of crime within that gated community it is feasible that he would have followed any bloke on his own who he didn't recognise

I agree that allegations of stereotyping shouldn't be brought into a trial as such, and only the 'real' evidence should be heard.
However, I disagree with your last point. If that had been a middle class white college boy I am pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted differently. If you don't think that then fair enough, but if you don't then I also think you are either very naive or just being pedantic for the sake of your argument.

 

[taconinja]

if martin was right or wrong following the kid is not relevant in terms of convicting him of murder though is it

Not in the legal nicieties of it, no.
Doesn't alter the fact that he probably provoked a situation that would not have happened if the kid had looked like a nice middle class white college boy though does it?

so what are you saying then he should have been sentenced because people have the opinion he stereotyped the lad? the legal niceties are everything when sending someone to trial

the police said there was not enough evidence to prove he didn't act in self defence, politically pressure was put on to charge him, it went to court and based on evidence or lack of he was cleared, what else could they do?

As usual america's gun laws are to blame for Zimmerman's freedom, something they are unwilling to rectify

the key element to the case is the point where he decided to follow martin and the point at which he was shot, nobody knows what happened in between and one poor sod can't give his account

unlike some i can't say Zimmerman followed this lad because he was black, only Zimmerman knows the answer to this, if you look at the history of crime within that gated community it is feasible that he would have followed any bloke on his own who he didn't recognise

In most states to establish self-defense, you have to show that you could no longer retreat and if you took aggressive action when you could have retreated, you forfeit the right to self-defense. There are exceptions of course.

 

[hilts]

You're welcome to present a cogent counter-argument. I'll wait.

And most of the protesting seems to be of a non-violent nature. I'm sure that's quite disappointing to some.

Well, "When asked why Mr. Martin looked suspicious, his response was because he was Black." is not true.

Fair point. That's my interpretation of (and I'm paraphrasing for the pedantic) "He looked suspicious because he was walking in the rain." He's a racist. He murdered a kid. That's the long and short of it. Was he found not guilty? Yes. I'm not a court of law, though. I can think whatever I judge to be reasonable. He's a piece of trash.

wow

so if someone looks suspicious and he is black that is rascist

if he is white that is being paranoid no doubt

if someone is wearing a stripey jumper, mask and has blag on his bag would this be okay?

 

[taconinja]

Well, "When asked why Mr. Martin looked suspicious, his response was because he was Black." is not true.

Fair point. That's my interpretation of (and I'm paraphrasing for the pedantic) "He looked suspicious because he was walking in the rain." He's a racist. He murdered a kid. That's the long and short of it. Was he found not guilty? Yes. I'm not a court of law, though. I can think whatever I judge to be reasonable. He's a piece of trash.

wow

Ah let me clarify.

I don't give one single fuck what you think. Have we established that? Good.

I've reviewed the interviews, the documents released so far, and also have followed the trial closely. Zimmerman has a history of violence and I've met dickwads like him. I'm not going to sit there and waffle on what I think of him.

You have a different view? Good. That's nice.

 

[Ronnie the Rep]

Not in the legal nicieties of it, no.
Doesn't alter the fact that he probably provoked a situation that would not have happened if the kid had looked like a nice middle class white college boy though does it?

so what are you saying then he should have been sentenced because people have the opinion he stereotyped the lad? the legal niceties are everything when sending someone to trial

the police said there was not enough evidence to prove he didn't act in self defence, politically pressure was put on to charge him, it went to court and based on evidence or lack of he was cleared, what else could they do?

As usual america's gun laws are to blame for Zimmerman's freedom, something they are unwilling to rectify

the key element to the case is the point where he decided to follow martin and the point at which he was shot, nobody knows what happened in between and one poor sod can't give his account

unlike some i can't say Zimmerman followed this lad because he was black, only Zimmerman knows the answer to this, if you look at the history of crime within that gated community it is feasible that he would have followed any bloke on his own who he didn't recognise

I agree that allegations of stereotyping shouldn't be brought into a trial as such, and only the 'real' evidence should be heard.
However, I disagree with your last point. If that had been a middle class white college boy I am pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted differently. If you don't think that then fair enough, but if you don't then I also think you are either very naive or just being pedantic for the sake of your argument.

Evening Mackenzie. I think if you base this solely on the evidence presented and the Florida "stand your ground" laws then there wasn't much choice but to find him not guilty. Anything else is supposition (even though you may be right) we will never know who did what or the thoughts of Zimmerman for sure

 

[i kne albert davy]

You're welcome to present a cogent counter-argument. I'll wait.

And most of the protesting seems to be of a non-violent nature. I'm sure that's quite disappointing to some.

Well, "When asked why Mr. Martin looked suspicious, his response was because he was Black." is not true.

Fair point. That's my interpretation of (and I'm paraphrasing for the pedantic) "He looked suspicious because he was walking in the rain." He's a racist. He murdered a kid. That's the long and short of it. Was he found not guilty? Yes. I'm not a court of law, though. I can think whatever I judge to be reasonable. He's a piece of trash.

How do you work out if Zimmermans a racist you don't know whether he is or not you make one phrase up and then your next fantasy is he's a racist, have you never thought someone looks suspicious like looking though car windows with a brick in their hand, you have no idea how the lad was acting so stop making things up it makes you look silly.

 

[mackenzie]

so what are you saying then he should have been sentenced because people have the opinion he stereotyped the lad? the legal niceties are everything when sending someone to trial

the police said there was not enough evidence to prove he didn't act in self defence, politically pressure was put on to charge him, it went to court and based on evidence or lack of he was cleared, what else could they do?

As usual america's gun laws are to blame for Zimmerman's freedom, something they are unwilling to rectify

the key element to the case is the point where he decided to follow martin and the point at which he was shot, nobody knows what happened in between and one poor sod can't give his account

unlike some i can't say Zimmerman followed this lad because he was black, only Zimmerman knows the answer to this, if you look at the history of crime within that gated community it is feasible that he would have followed any bloke on his own who he didn't recognise

I agree that allegations of stereotyping shouldn't be brought into a trial as such, and only the 'real' evidence should be heard.
However, I disagree with your last point. If that had been a middle class white college boy I am pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted differently. If you don't think that then fair enough, but if you don't then I also think you are either very naive or just being pedantic for the sake of your argument.

Evening Mackenzie. I think if you base this solely on the evidence presented and the Florida "stand your ground" laws then there wasn't much choice but to find him not guilty. Anything else is supposition (even though you may be right) we will never know who did what or the thoughts of Zimmerman for sure

Evening to you too Ronnie ;-)

And yes, I can agree with much of that.

Still leaves a smell though.

 

[hilts]

Fair point. That's my interpretation of (and I'm paraphrasing for the pedantic) "He looked suspicious because he was walking in the rain." He's a racist. He murdered a kid. That's the long and short of it. Was he found not guilty? Yes. I'm not a court of law, though. I can think whatever I judge to be reasonable. He's a piece of trash.

wow

Ah let me clarify.

I don't give one single fuck what you think. Have we established that? Good.

I've reviewed the interviews, the documents released so far, and also have followed the trial closely. Zimmerman has a history of violence and I've met dickwads like him. I'm not going to sit there and waffle on what I think of him.

You have a different view? Good. That's nice.

whereas your good self seem such a chilled out easy going chap, a bet your nickname was horizontal at school your so chilled

if you were neighbourhood watch i wouldn't advise people to leave their houses

 

[ElanJo]

I've not paid much attention to the trial I admit. However, one thing seems resoundingly clear; that if Zimmerman had not been so vigilante in going after this lad then the lad would still be alive.

What actions exactly justify the use of "vigilante"? I'm not arguing either way, I don't think it's even relevant as to whether he was justified in using deadly force, but one action that kind of goes against the impression that he was a vigilante is the fact that he called the police.

On the flip side, we could say Trayvon would be alive had he continued to go home when he ran off. He had 4 minutes to walk, nevermind run, approximately 300ft. But, again, even if Trayvon walked or ran back upo to the T section it has little bearing on whether Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, which is what the trial was about.

Nothing, in my mind anyway, justifies a vigilante.
As for the rest of your post EJ it just seems that would have expected Trayvon to be more accountable for his actions than Zimmerman. And that to me is just so wrong on several levels.
So Trayvon was the manufacturer of his own demise??

I didn't ask that. I asked what justifies the use of the term "vigilante" :)

It's possible. Even without speculating about those 3-4 minutes pre running off down the dog path, He didn't get off Zimmerman when John Good came out and told him to stop.

 

[Skashion]

I am shocked with the amount of people agreeing with this murderer's charter.

 

[taconinja]

wow

Ah let me clarify.

I don't give one single fuck what you think. Have we established that? Good.

I've reviewed the interviews, the documents released so far, and also have followed the trial closely. Zimmerman has a history of violence and I've met dickwads like him. I'm not going to sit there and waffle on what I think of him.

You have a different view? Good. That's nice.

whereas your good self seem such a chilled out easy going chap, a bet your nickname was horizontal at school your so chilled

if you were neighbourhood watch i wouldn't advise people to leave their houses

Neighborhood watch? Nah, I was a cop for four years. No interest in watching some puffed up idiots who think they're in an action movie run around neighborhoods pretending to be actual law enforcement.

And I'm not angry in the slightest. I'm just not going to mince words about these subjects.

 

[hilts]

Not in the legal nicieties of it, no.
Doesn't alter the fact that he probably provoked a situation that would not have happened if the kid had looked like a nice middle class white college boy though does it?

so what are you saying then he should have been sentenced because people have the opinion he stereotyped the lad? the legal niceties are everything when sending someone to trial

the police said there was not enough evidence to prove he didn't act in self defence, politically pressure was put on to charge him, it went to court and based on evidence or lack of he was cleared, what else could they do?

As usual america's gun laws are to blame for Zimmerman's freedom, something they are unwilling to rectify

the key element to the case is the point where he decided to follow martin and the point at which he was shot, nobody knows what happened in between and one poor sod can't give his account

unlike some i can't say Zimmerman followed this lad because he was black, only Zimmerman knows the answer to this, if you look at the history of crime within that gated community it is feasible that he would have followed any bloke on his own who he didn't recognise

I agree that allegations of stereotyping shouldn't be brought into a trial as such, and only the 'real' evidence should be heard.
However, I disagree with your last point. If that had been a middle class white college boy I am pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted differently. If you don't think that then fair enough, but if you don't then I also think you are either very naive or just being pedantic for the sake of your argument.

what i think or what you do is not relevant that is the point, i have never defended Zimmerman once, you said you were pretty sure Zimmerman would have acted differently if the kid was a white college looking kid, that statement alone says there is a possiblilty he might have acted in the same way

we all stereotype people to a certain degree, let me ask you this if Zimmerman saw a young white lad with tattoo's wearing a hoodie hanging around would he have followed him as well?

 

[ElanJo]

You're welcome to present a cogent counter-argument. I'll wait.

And most of the protesting seems to be of a non-violent nature. I'm sure that's quite disappointing to some.

Well, "When asked why Mr. Martin looked suspicious, his response was because he was Black." is not true.

Fair point. That's my interpretation of (and I'm paraphrasing for the pedantic) "He looked suspicious because he was walking in the rain." He's a racist. He murdered a kid. That's the long and short of it. Was he found not guilty? Yes. I'm not a court of law, though. I can think whatever I judge to be reasonable. He's a piece of trash.

lol No further questions... :)

 

[hilts]

Ah let me clarify.

I don't give one single fuck what you think. Have we established that? Good.

I've reviewed the interviews, the documents released so far, and also have followed the trial closely. Zimmerman has a history of violence and I've met dickwads like him. I'm not going to sit there and waffle on what I think of him.

You have a different view? Good. That's nice.

whereas your good self seem such a chilled out easy going chap, a bet your nickname was horizontal at school your so chilled

if you were neighbourhood watch i wouldn't advise people to leave their houses

Neighborhood watch? Nah, I was a cop for four years. No interest in watching some puffed up idiots who think they're in an action movie run around neighborhoods pretending to be actual law enforcement.

And I'm not angry in the slightest. I'm just not going to mince words about these subjects.

a cop where?

 

[ElanJo]

I am shocked with the amount of people agreeing with this murderer's charter.

How's that?