Zimmerman is not a white man he is a brown man

I think props are in order for my first hand knowledge of the new Princes name, I mean this just proves the Queen did agree with me.

 

Zimmerman (the only living witness) says that Trayvon was walking on paved areas and talking on his phone. He said Trayvon "looked around", but I don't recall him saying he was looking into windows.

So, did Zimmerman call the cops because a person was walking in the rain? I see that every time it rains, and don't feel that the pededstrian is about to commit a crime.
Did Zimmerman call the cops because a person was not staring at his shoes while he walked? Most people "look around" as they walk, and reasonable people don't take this as evidence they're about to commit a crime.
Did Zimmerman call the cops because Trayvon was talking on a phone? Again, pretty unlikely.

What's left that might have made Zimmerman characterize Trayvon as a potential criminal.... That's a tough one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY04gIruZ4E

Now, let's look at the facts:
An adult used his vehicle to follow a teenager at night, while that teenager was on his way home from the store. When the teen attempted to get away from the stalker, he was followed on foot. At some point, the teen asked the apparent stalker what his problem was, and the adult still chose not to identify himself or provide any reason for following the teen.... According to Zimmerman, who has the most motive to lie by making Trayvon look bad, Martin used unarmed attacks.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/.../0776.012.html

You can use non-lethal force to defend yourself if you believe that it is required to protect yourself. You don't have to be attacked first.
If anything, the fact that Trayvon didn't have a mark on him (other than a bullet wound) proves that Zimmerman didn't even try to use proportionate force, he just skipped straight to shooting his stalking victim to death.

The fact that Trayvon would have been protected by SYG seems to totally elude people...

 

Hello pot, kettle calling...
Going off topic to belittle someone else for going off topic?
Aren't we all a bunch of hypocrites?

 

white people have no right to their property or even to live

kill all the crackaz and their babies

 

Sounds really harsh until you find out the Pilgrims did it to the Native Americans.

 

Whether Zimmerman is brown or white is irrelevant

Whatever Zimmerman was approaching Martin for it irrelevant, except insofar as it pertains to how Zimmerman approached.

Statement two is where I have a problem. It assumes Martin was guilty of attacking Zimmerman whereas the 911 conversation and all witness testimony is generally indicative of the opposite. It also simply makes no sense. Why would anyone attack someone outweighing them by 100lbs who has indicated no fear of him whatsoever, indeed, has aggressively harassed him. (Which, in fact, we hear Zimmerman doing on the tape)

I think it fairly obvious that Zimmerman ran after Martin and Martin, unable to run away fast enough, turned to face him. At this point Zimmerman ran up and probably pulled his gun. (Since he carried it at his back how could he have done so when laying on the ground with someone atop him?) Then Martin began to loudly beg for his life and Zimmeman, probably told him to shut up and not alarm the neighbors. Martin, logically supposing himself about to be shot, knocked Zimmerman to the ground and then jumped on top of him to make sure that Zimmerman could not get back up and shoot him. Tragically, Zimmerman was not disarmed as Martin had thought.

My problem is that the Jury bought Zimmerman's story largely because the only one who could clearly gainsay it, Martin, was dead, despite the fact that Zimmerman changed it several times and it was shot through with more inconsistencies than a Spielberg movie. I am not assuming Zimmerman's guilt. I am just not assuming Martin's guilt either, and following logic instead of obvious concoction.

If Zimmerman is really not guilty then so is O.J.

 

Gun nuts believe SYG only applies if you are ARMED. In fact, even self-defense seems to apply only if you're armed. If you are not armed, you deserve to be killed by any True Patriot who takes it into their mind to harass you.

If Zimmerman is really not guilty then so is O.J.

 

He followed him because TM matched the description of the persons who where reportedly involved in the local home burglaries. They were reported as young black males. He wasn't out to catch a black person.... he was out to catch a burglar.

 

What is fairly obvious here is that you didn't follow the trial or left out a few facts.
According to the non emergency phone timeline, GZ lost eyesight of TM for four minutes.
It was about 100 yards from the car to TM's house, so TM could have been home in less than a minute, which according to his gal on the phone he stated that he had reached his back porch. Therefore your theory of a fat guy outrunning a much younger and fitter guy is debunked. TM had to retrace his steps and go back approximately 60 yards to run into GZ.
Not even the prosecution was dumb enough to put forth the theory that the gun was pulled out before they ended up on the ground. Only in the movies does someone start a physical fight with someone with a gun drawn on them. I assure you it's not human nature to do so, and would have gotten TM killed before a mark was ever on GZ.

 

Kind of a circular thinking, isn't it? Since most of the "reports" (including the one involving a very innocent 9 year old!) were made by Zimmerman himself!

DUH!

 

Most is not all. He wanted to stop the burglaries. Anyone who believes different has not been paying attention, or has an agenda.

 

Could you tell me (with factual evidence to back up your statement, obviously) how many of those "reports" led to an arrest and a conviction for those "thefts" committed by "young Black Men?"

And. . .how many of those "reports" were based on suspicions as "valid" as that that led to Martin's death, and how many were just more racial profiling based on racial stereotypes and on the paranoia specific to Zimmerman?

As I said. . .circular thinking, that explains the "suspicions" triggered by young Black men by previous "suspicions" that were NOT proven correct. . .unless of courses you can show that those suspicions were followed by arrest and that those suspicious young Black men were prosecuted and found guilty in more than 50% of the reports!

 

Local TV coverage here did interviews with some of the victims of break ins. One couple said they came home to an invader in their home as he ran out. There had been one arrest made not too long before this incident. Both times the perpertrator was black. I don't live far from Twin Lakes and this area is predominately black so it's no surprise. It was common knowledge around here that the neighbors knew that the burglaries were being committed by black men.

 

Except, you know the neighborhood was plagued with crime, and you know it was not just George reporting. I think we are supposed to stick with facts, perhaps you missed the new rules?

 

Yup, daytime robberies for which a suspect had already been caught by police... Definately warrants stalking a teenager around the neighborhood at night and then failing to identify yourself or ask any question when asked what you problem is...

 

So if someone asks me what my problem is and I dont say anything you are saying it is acceptable for them to sucker punch me and start crushing my skull onto concrete?

 

Religion is losing its attraction with sensible people and you consider yourself a catholic.... interesting thought.

 

If someone follows a teenager around the neighborhood at night, and refuses to identify themselves or providing any justification when confronted, are you saying it is unreasonable for the teenager to assume the person is a threat?

Law relating to self defense in Florida is pretty clear, and SYG means Trayvon had no obligation to avoid the conflict that Zimmerman provoked.

As for "crushing his skull onto concrete", this is a total fabrication. The scalp bleeds severely from even the tiniest laceration. The "wounds" on the back of Zimmerman's head were hardly life threatening, and he didn't even have a concussion.

 

Those people don't care about the truth. They only care about what's going to help the Democratic party. Just ask them how many of them vote Republican. Point proven.

Oh, okay then. So you agree that Trayvon Martin was also racist since he BLATANTLY CALLED GEORGE ZIMMERMAN A "CRACKER." Right? Which means that - if you don't have to be overtly racist to let prejudice effect (sic) your actions, like you claim - then there is just enough reason to believe that Trayvon only beat George up because he thought he was white and not because he was supposedly following him. In fact, there's actually more reason to believe that Trayvon's actions were racially motivated since he openly called George a racist slur before the altercation. Whereas it's all just speculation with Zimmerman.

 

Can you explain exactly how admitting that Trayvon was legally defending himself against a perceived threat might benefit the Democratic party?

"Supposedly" following him? That's not a contested point... Zimmerman even admits that he was following Trayvon... He also admits that he didn't identify himself or give any reason for following a teenager around at night when Trayvon asked him what his problem was. Under those conditions, can you explain how Trayvon could see Zimmerman as anything other than a psycho/stalker/threat?
Thanks to SYG, and the fact that Trayvon was in an area he was legally allowed to be, he had every right to defend himself with force from a perceived threat. He was REACTING to the ACTIONS of another person.

Zimmerman choosing to follow Trayvon in the first place was not a reaction to anything specific Trayvon was doing, because there is nothing suspicious about a person walking home while talking on a cell phone. Zimmerman chose to follow Trayvon on the basis of his race. It's really not that complicated, and it's not (or shouldn't be) a Democrat/Republican issue.

 

Can you explain why the only people who seem to believe this appear to be leftists?

You're conveniently leaving out the part where Trayvon first advanced on George while George was still in his truck. Do you not remember the part of the 911 call where George says, "He's coming to check me out." At this point, Trayvon circles the truck and George rolls up his window to avoid confrontation. George did not follow Trayvon until after this occurred. So who exactly gave who reason to believe they were a psycho/stalker/threat?

You Trayvon supporters are so quick to play this card because you want to believe it so badly that you don't even stop to consider what you're positing. You claim that George profiled Trayvon because he was black. Yet I ask you, do you honestly think this whole incident still would have happened if Trayvon Martin had fit the description of BB King, Oprah Winfrey, Bryant Gumbel, Beyonce, or Steve Urkel? Be honest for a second. Let's go through these individually here. If Trayvon had been an 80 year old black man in a wheelchair, would this incident have happened? If Trayvon had been a well-dressed, middle aged, and slightly overweight black woman, would this incident have happened? If Trayvon had been a well-dressed, mild mannered, middle aged black man, would this incident have happened? If Trayvon had been a hot young black female, would this incident have happened? If Trayvon had been a studious young black nerd with timid body language, would this incident have happened? In order for your claim to be true that George profiled Trayvon because he was black, every one of those other scenarios would have to be just as likely. If they are not, then that points to something else, doesn't it?

Here's the point that you guys don't want to acknowledge. Trayvon fit a multi-component profile that is statistically more likely to cause crime. Young, black, male, and dressed a certain way. You guys hyper-focus on the black part while ignoring all the other equally important elements. In addition to all of this, you have to factor in the context of the environment and surrounding circumstances. Trayvon wasn't walking past George at the mall on a sunny Saturday afternoon. He was walking behind the town homes (not on the sidewalk or the street) at night in the rain in a complex that had previously reported multiple break-ins. And George didn't recognize him. Trayvon then advanced on George while George was in his truck on the phone with the police. Are you honestly going to tell me that doesn't qualify as suspicious?

 

This is exactly why I asked for FACTS about the number or reports and the conclusion of those reports. . .I guess you missed that post? Because if you had not. . .I am sure you would have provided those FACTS to support your belief that "the neighborhood was plagued with crime" and that other people were reporting those "suspicious" young Black men with as much fervor as George. . . and that those reports WERE followed by ARRESTS and CONVICTIONS. . .rather than just "feeding the old stereotypes of the big, bad, young Black men as suspicious and worthy of being reported?"

 

Most is good enough to demonstrate a trend that is quite disturbing and totally demonstrates Zimmerman's paranoia and the reason why he is the perfect poster child for "the hero syndrome!"

Thank you for being honest about this. A rare quality in this sad, tragic affair!

 

I'm going to repost this because apparently you are ignoring these facts..... The victims were interviewed....
Local TV coverage here did interviews with some of the victims of break ins. One couple said they came home to an invader in their home as he ran out. There had been one arrest made not too long before this incident. Both times the perpetrator was black. I don't live far from Twin Lakes and this area is predominately black so it's no surprise. It was common knowledge around here that the neighbors knew that the burglaries were being committed by black men.

 

Two documented incidents involving Black men in a area of hundreds of housing units in a couple of years is hardly a "plague!"

And. . .the arrest of ONE Black man was made just a few days prior to the killing of Trayvon Martin. . .and George was well aware of that arrest, so why did he have to be "suspicious" of this unarmed young man when he KNEW that the "alleged" perpetrator of the burglaries in his neighborhood had been apprehended?

By the way. . .do you have a factual source that shows that this man was found guilty of the burglaries?

It seems that too many people are building a case based on "suspicions" that have NOT been proven. . .I believe I remember hearing during the trial that only one or two of those "suspicious report" had led to (not a conviction, not even an arrest but) a mere "questioning" of the "suspicious" person.

Hardly enough to build a case against every Black teenager walking the neighborhood!