Zimmerman is not a white man he is a brown man

Incorrect, your statement assumes that the only basis offered by Zimmerman as to why he perceived Martin as suspicious was coming from between houses. There were a number of other factors offered by Zimmerman which collectively formed the makeup of his suspicions. Also, although the route is a short cut that doesnt exclude the possiblity of the criminal element from emerging between buildings as well. This, along with the fact that it was at night certainly warranted observation by Zimmerman. Surely you don't propose that watchman cannot 'watch' persons at night emerging between buildings? In fact, he would be derelict in NOT observing him.
Lastly, we are interchangeably using the concepts of 'suspiciousness' with 'warranting observation'. I propose that its reasonable to watch someone without them being suspicious at times. A group of teenage boys walking around at dusk may not be suspicious but warrants observing them as a watchman. Remember, people do not have the right to NOT be observed and watched while in a public space.

Respectfully,

 

Your source doesn't show that at all. And your source isn't a source at all but a blog run by some guy who is speculating just as your are. He uses the same google earth picture that shows there is no paved path between the two houses. You are making (*)(*)(*)(*) up!

 

No harassment was established by the prosecutors a legitimate purpose was establish by Zimmerman as he was checking on a suspicious character which turn out to be T. Martin.

Martin attacked Zimmerman not the other way around. No emotional distress was also establish only aggression and poor judgement on the part of Trayvon.

The prosecutors including you and Trayvon supporters have failed to established that Trayvon was not acting suspicious the jury agree that Zimmerman was in his lawful duty as a volunteer neighbourhood watchman to check on suspicious people. The dispatcher advice Zimmerman not to follow for the safety of Zimmerman.

What is clear is that Trayvon's supporters are out of touch with reality and facts that is why no courts will ever agree with their position or wild claims they have no case because they don't have the facts right.

 

According to the legal definition, yes..... lol

 

Once again, let's look at the situation:
- He was followed around at night by a stranger, for no apparent reason...
- He attempted to avoid the stranger, and the stranger kept searching for him.
- He approached the stranger and asked what the problem was, and the stranger didn't identify himself or give any explanation.
- Trayvon deciding that this stranger represented an imminent threat doesn't seem unreasonable, Trayvon was following SYG when he used non-lethal force to respond to an imminent threat.

- - - Updated - - -

SYG indicates that you can use non-lethal force to defend yourself from an imminent threat any time you are in an area you are legally allowed to be... Fit's Trayvon's actions perfectly.

 

Racism is far from that idiot's only issue... as evidenced by the soap opera that is his life since the trial... but it is certainly a key one.
After all, what other motive is there?

You might want to double check your facts, the break-ins in the neighborhood were committed during the day, not the night.
Besides, is 6:30 pm is "the middle of the night" now?

Really? Wouldn't actually speaking to him rather than following him around the neighborhood have been more productive?

Which means none of that was relevant, so I don't know why it got brought up other than to put a teenager on trial for his own murder...
A teenager smoked dope?! Definitely worth the death penalty...
A teenager had the nerve to tweet about fights?! I guess that's way worse that Zimmerman's obsession with MMA...
A teenager dared to be interested in guns?! So it's admirable for Saint George to carry a firearm, but a sign of guilt for Trayvon to have tweeted about them?
A teenager had an unstable home life?! He must be a terrible person deserving the death penalty!

According to the only person with a motive to lie, who was on mood-altering medication that causes aggression and delusions, and who had recently been left by his wife... Right...

BTW, if someone follows you around at night and you ask them what their problem is, you're not the person doing the harassing...

 

Following a teenager around the neighbourhood, at night, on the basis of his appearance - and refusing to identify yourself or explain your actions... is a great way to get identified as an 'imminent threat'.

 

Could you provide more clarity on the other factors offered by Zimmerman, and illustrate that those were viable to note while driving past on a rainy night?
Given that the history of break-ins largely occurred during the day, what was it about Trayvon's use of a route (commonly used by residents) that warranted not just observation but being followed around the neighborhood?

 

Thank you for your reply,

There is no evidence or testimony that "Zimmerman was following a teenager around the neighborhood, at night, on the basis of his appearance - and refusing to identify himself or explain his actions". You have invented this scenario and subsequently characterized this non event as an "imminent threat". Remember, you being the accuser have a duty to offer evidence at prima-fascia and THEN attempt to assign guilt. What you are doing is manufacturing a narrative and assigning guilt.

*Zimmerman didn't know that Martin was 17 years old but said he looked to be in his 'late teens' which certainly conforms to what people consider as adult in the context of suspicious behavior. You mention this not out of a sense of fairness but to discredit Zimmerman apart from the truth.

*Martin followed Zimmerman for some 40% of the known distances(video proof from the clubhouse)). Martin followed Zimmerman first(video proof from the clubhouse). Martin followed Zimmerman last(according to Martins GF).. Zimmerman's following of Martin almost was entirely in his truck at a distance. Zimmerman got out of his truck and ran to the point that Martin disappeared(Phone call tp PD). The 'chase' of some 150' didn't involve Zimmerman seeing Martin ahead and attempting to overcome him.
You remove all contextual elements in order to vilify Zimmerman. Let the truth stand on its own.

*There is no evidence or testimony that Zimmerman followed Martin based on his appearance. Where did you get that from? MSNBC? Bill Mahar? Look at the transcript. Zimmerman gave a pretty detailed rational for his suspicious. None were in regards to Martins appearance. Martins hoodie and blackness were not offered by Zimmerman but elicited by the dispatcher.

*There is no evidence or testimony that Zimmerman 'refused' to identify himself. There was never a time that was applicable or relevant to do so. You are the one making the claim. Where was it and when was it exactly that Zimmerman 'refused to identify himself"? Its your claim to prove. Where were they standing and how far apart were they etc? You don't know. The only moment that could be considered as an opportunity was when Martin suddenly surprised Zimmerman in the dark. Thus Zimmerman is walking to his truck, is surprised from the rear and Martin makes a statement such as "YOU GOTTA PROBLEM"? Zimmermans response was"No, I dont" and Martin punched him.
Some people would have been a bit more explanitory at that moment, if they weren't on their couch eating Cheetos while Zimmerman was watching peoples homes and kids at his own peril, for free. Most people have good intentions, few people actually do something.

Respectfully,

 

Thank you for your reply,

You are in error in that you suppose that Zimmerman has any obligation to reconcile his suspicions to anything other than his own judgement. There is no law, no ethos, no rule, no list, no code and no recognized rational as to what constitutes a "viable" suspicion. The barer of that definition lies absolutely with the person and no other source. You want clarity on 'factors'. Zimmerman is required to offer none, defend none and explain none. Yet he did. Dark, rain, some unknown guy in a yard that he knew wasnt his. Suspicious actions(Zimmerman defines this, not you) and no obvious and purposeful destination within the complex(Zimmerman defines this, not you). He looked like he was on drugs(Zimmerman defines this, not you).

Martin first appeared between two buildings that had been burgled before which was near another unit that had been burgled also. The 'cut through' that you speak of is probably why this was a hot spot for such activity. For you to dismiss a stranger at night as a possible burglar because burglars usually had worked in the daytime is simply naive or disingenuous.

This is the verdict. The people that are anti-Zimmerman know the least about the specifics about the case. They embrace a generality and close their eyes. They have little interest in the actual dynamic and facts but are absorbed with making the Martin case fit into the mold of an "anti gun, anti barney Fife, anti racist" agenda.

Lastly, you can walk around where you want, when you want and for whatever reason you want. And you can follow who you want to an extent that it becomes illegal. And that definition of what is legal following is expanded when you are a concerned citizen or watchman.


Respectfully, thanks again.

 

Martin chose to follow Zimmerman first. Martin chose to walk down the street toward Zimmerman in lieu of a shorter and safer side-walked path around the lake. And later, per Martins girlfriend Martin left his house to go confront Zimmerman.

You characterize this encounter as though they were having a long and friendly conversation. Martin surprises Zimmerman and punches him. Ive been scared a number of times myself. I don't suppose that I once uttered the most rational response but something more like, "UGH......BLUGH.....DUGH...".

Martin had a choice to not follow Zimmerman first but to take a number of other paths. Martin went home and left again with the intent to confront. Also, do you really believe that the 6'-1" 158 lb athletic Martin actually couldn't run from the chubby 205 lb Zimmerman who was wearing work boots. Like I have said before, I suppose that Martin in those 4 minutes could have run around the building and ran laps around Zimmerman NASCAR style if he chose to.

Respectfully,

 

Thank you for your post,
Its a leap in logic to assume that the fact that there is a 'cut through' eliminates the possibility of someone being worthy of further observation. Also, you shucked the fact that Martin stopped in a yard that wasn't his as an element in Zimmerman's suspicions. I don't want to get personal but do you really expect others to believe that if you lived in that complex and looked out and seen Martin emerge from the darkness and stand in your neighbors yard that you wouldnt look at him?????????????????????????? Really? And observe him persistently until its logical conclusion?
Also, Zimmerman saw Martin in a grassy area first, not a paved area.
You say that, "Trayvon wasn't any more suspicious than any other resident". You offer a false comparison. You compare Martin who was in the dark, in the rain etc. to people that weren't in the dark, in the rain etc. You will have a valid point when everyone else is walking around in the dark, in the rain, in Frank Taaffes yard, next to the window that was burgled, acting like their own drugs, looking into homes etc. etc. etc.

Respectfully,

 

So it is invalid to question whether Zimmerman's suspicions about Trayvon were justified, but it is valid to question whether Trayvon would be justified in seeing a Zimmerman as an imminent threat?

As for your 'verdict', I assume you are aware that at the time of the incident, Zimmerman's marriage was falling apart and he was on prescription medication that is known to cause aggression and delusions?

Lastly, given the existence of SYG, you have the right to use non-lethal force to protect yourself from an imminent threat - which is what Trayvon was doing...

 

What is clear is that Zimmerman's story changed regularly. Until he chose to change his story, he clearly indicated to police (and the dispatcher on the night) that he was following...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qiub3siGrb8

Being such a fan of video footage, I presume you're familiar with the footage included in the below link - which indicates that Zimmerman was not injured by Trayvon?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPMF9gfQm9g

As for prima-fascia evidence, why not rely on the opinion of experts...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-i2T3OP39g

The reasons Zimmerman gave for finding Trayvon suspicious (depending on which version of his story you prefer) include the fact that Zimmerman did not recognize him as a resident (though he couldn't expect to remember everyone in the complex since he doesn't even know the street names). He also said that Trayvon was walking too casually considering the weather (a light rain didn't cause him to run while on the phone)... Are there any other damning behaviors I am missing?

 

Utilizing a 'cut through' did not make Trayvon any more suspicious than any of the other folks who regularly used it - that was my point.

You seem to be insinuating that Zimmerman would call the police and/or follow ANYONE he saw walking in the rain in the evening... Whereas it is reasonable to believe that Zimmerman had previously been outside in the rain at the same time as other people, there seems to be no history supporting this...
Don't misunderstand... There is extensive history of him calling to report suspicious people - almost always black people - including a report of a 9 year old.

 

I do not and have not said anything about Martins right to perceive Zimmerman in any particular way or was or was not justified concerning eminent threat. Also, you changed the subject. You made demands upon Zimmerman to justify his perceptions and rational about his suspicions/following of Martin. Now you are wanting to know if Martin was equally justified in his perceptions/actions or not. Which is a different subject.
Again, Zimmerman has no obligation by any measure to offer any justification for what he perceives or why he follows someone from afar as to maintain a persistent visual observation of a person until PD arrives.

There is no testimony or evidence that demonstrated or even implied that Zimmerman was either delusional or aggressive. He wasn't aggressive on the phone, he sounded calm and rational. Of the many people that had contact with Zimmerman at the time none offered anything in the way of Zimmerman being aggressive or delusional. There was nothing in the police report, there was nothing in the Paramedics report. But the THC in Martins blood can cause paranoia. The 'Lean' that Martin often consumed that destroyed his liver can also cause paranoia. Martin was agitated on the phone, called Zimmerman a 'cracker' and beat up Zimmerman.
The only things that you have against Zimmerman are 'possibilities' while there are 'facts' against Martin.

The fleet of foot Martin was long gone when Zimmerman ran to where he had last seen him at the 'T'. The common myth is that there was a foot chase in which Martin was in close proximity with Zimmerman close behind. Not so. There was never a time where Zimmerman was close to Martin and when Martin bolted and ran he immediately went out of Zimmerman's view. Zimmerman ran to the point where the T was and that is where the dispatcher asked him not to follow Martin. Zimmerman said okay and complied and continued walking down the path AWAY from where he knew Martin went in order to get an address for PD. There was no chase. Zimmerman is walking back to his truck when Martin jumps out and bashes him in the face. Martin had the absolute ability to dictate if they had a physical confrontation or not. Martin went home and then came back to attack Zimmerman from behind.

Respectfully, thanks again.

 

George claimed he was white on all his job applications and school applications....

 

Rule 11.

You have made this claim multiple times and have never ever sourced it do it now or shut it forever.

 

Jesus.. The applications have been on the internet for over a year.

 

That's just amusing...
On one hand, you're indicating that Zimmerman has no measure to illustrate his state of mind in following Martin - and on the other hand you're saying there is no evidence he was being aggressive... Sounds like you don't WANT there to be any.

It's a 'fact' that there was little (if any) reason to follow Martin in the first place.
It's a 'fact' that any reasonable person (much less a teenager) being followed around at night by a stranger could consider that stranger a potential threat.
It's a 'fact' that Martin initially asked Zimmerman what his problem was, and Zimmerman chose not to identify himself or provide any reason for harassing a teenager at night.
It's a 'fact' that a strong case could be put forward that Martin's actions were justified under SYG.

I take it you haven't listened to the recorded conversation between Zimmerman and the police dispatcher... You can clearly hear Zimmerman's car chiming when he opens his door to follow Martin, which is when the dispatcher asks whether Zimmerman is following him. Zimmerman answers in the affirmative and is immediately asked not to do that. This short part of the conversation started as Zimmerman was getting out of his vehicle, not sometime later.

Didn't you just say Zimmerman ran in the direction that he last saw Martin? How are you now saying there was no chase?
I take it you haven't seem Zimmerman's recreation of the night, in which he gives a completely different version to what you just said... For example, Martin asked Zimmerman what his problem was - and let Zimmerman answer - before there was any physical confrontation.
If you believe Martin actually made it home and went back out, please feel free to site a source... Not that it would make any difference to the legality of his actions under SYG.

 

Then it should be easy for you to find them and post them. If not then you should be quiet and stop making unsupported claims of fact.

 

They have been around for a year.

Do you really need to be spoon fed or are you actually interested? You have the link to the jailhouse phone calls where GZ claims he is black.

 

A quick Google search of 'Zimmerman application' yields no such result. It does yield a few comments who repeat the same claim but no evidence comments in article are no more credible than you are. Hell it most likely is you.

So put up or be silent for ever. You are one post away from getting reported.

 

The documents were on line.. I don't know if they are still.. They were in one of the early evidence dumps about George's education.. but frankly, I don't care what color he claims to be from day to day.

 

Okay that is enough. Reported for a rule 10 violation. Hate do it and gave you more than ample opportunity to admit you were making it up.