The Trayvon Trial

Status
Not open for further replies.
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Vaclav_sl said:
Note: He was never admitted into the neighborhood watch - he was a WANNABE neighborhood watchman self-appointed by himself.
Click to expand...
False

From wikipedia "In September 2011, the Twin Lakes residents held an organizational meeting to create a neighborhood watch program. Zimmerman was selected by neighbors as the program's coordinator, according to Wendy Dorival, Neighborhood Watch organizer for the Sanford Police Department.[5][90] [5]"
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Also, " During the 18 months preceding the February 26 shooting, Zimmerman called the non-emergency police line seven times. On five of those calls, Zimmerman reported suspicious looking men in the area, but never offered the men's race without first being asked by the dispatcher.[86][87][88] Crimes committed at The Retreat in the year prior to Martin's death included eight burglaries, nine thefts, and one shooting.[89] Twin Lakes residents said there were dozens of reports of attempted break-ins, which had created an atmosphere of fear in their neighborhood.[63]"

So he called the non-emergency line seven times. Until Duppin can come up with a source for his 40+, sounds like BS. Quite a decent bit of crime going on there, so plenty of reason for him to be very suspicious of people wandering around.
 
Vaclav

Vaclav

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
12,650
877
Ahhhh - caught up on it - he was declined in another in 2008 and 2009 and then started his own NW chapter.... and he disobeyed the instructions from the PD in how a NW role should operate that they instructed him in when it was established.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/n...,7056736.storyfor the latter part.

He was instructed BY THE POLICE when he established it (not "just operators!") that he wasn't to pursue only report and wait.
 
Borzak

Borzak

Bronze Baron of the Realm
24,706
32,106
I was thinking about it today, if you can't read and write cursive who do you sign your name?
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
Vaclav_sl said:
Ahhhh - caught up on it - he was declined in another in 2008 and 2009 and then started his own NW chapter.... and he disobeyed the instructions from the PD in how a NW role should operate that they instructed him in when it was established.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/n...,7056736.storyfor the latter part.

He was instructed BY THE POLICE when he established it (not "just operators!") that he wasn't to pursue only report and wait.
Click to expand...
And any of that is relevant how?
 
Vaclav

Vaclav

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
12,650
877
It's a question of motivation and how he confronted - if someone is ignoring protocol on one side, why should you expect them to obey protocol on "not being aggressive", "not showing a weapon" or other if's that might have occurred?

He's breaking rules on one thing, but he's expected to stick to the letter of the law on another? Possible, but doesn't feel likely to me.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Vaclav_sl said:
He was instructed BY THE POLICE when he established it (not "just operators!") that he wasn't to pursue only report and wait.
Click to expand...
Its already been shown that when asked by the 911 operator, Zimmerman stopped pursuing Martin, and never actively pursued him beyond about 20 yards anyway.

And the police advising someone not to pursue long before the event has no legal bearing on the situation, either. That's an insurance thing. They can't tell citizens to pursue and apprehend a criminal, because they'll get sued if something happens.

You keep stretching for this point, but the facts simply don't support your view of things.
 
H

Hootie

Silver Knight of the Realm
216
60
You folks are letting some strange law in florida get the best of you. My post wasn't about racism or what i think the will be the end result of the trial. I'm just really sick of some of you defending the law, guns and all the facts in the case that will probably let a murderer walk free. I'm not not trying to be rational or dissect this case with the cold anonymous logic like some of you internet lawyers. I'm also not trying to create a virtual lynchmob here on this message board.

I am only here to state that in this case we know who the killer was, this isn't OJ. I just really want to say i think its wrong, and i want to know what other posters think. You can candidly point out how righteous you are for believeing in the justice system and the absolute nature of an acquittal. If you remember i said i don't believe in things being black or white, most are grey. What i mean is the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Most of you keep talking about the outcome of the trial like you know for sure that defending himself with lethal force is the only choice Zimmerman had and if it was the law protects him.

First why do some of you seem so sure this is what happened? Second why do some of you seem to enjoy pointing this out to everyone who has a different opinion? And finnally, why are so many of you alright with this?
Do you want to get shot randomly walking down the street someday and your killer go free? Oh wait , this will never happen to you or your family.

He died before his time because he (presumably, according to the evidence we have) decided to bring fists to a gunfight. Sometimes what happens in life isn't fair, isn't "justice", and isn't a happy ending. Sometimes life sucks. Martin made a fucked up decision if he decided to attack Zimmerman for following him around. Similarly, Zimmerman is a fucked up individual if he attacked Martin, Martin fought back, started winning and THEN Zimmerman shot him... in that case, it really is second degree murder. However, we have NO EVIDENCE that happened. Appeals to emotion and notions of justice for dead boy and "SOMEONE SHOULD PAY!" are just meaningless rancor that adds nothing. Go post this drivel on that Justice for Trayvon facebook page.
Click to expand...
This is my favorite quote from above because you admit that if Zimmerman attacked martin he is a,Quote " Fucked up individual/murderer". You say this to prove that your not defending Zimmerman, your defending the system and if he is a murderer you would judge him just as swiftly as i am. However, we have NO evidence that he is a murderer, you say. I am saying we have a dead body and we know who shot him, again its black and white with you guys. He is either guilty or innocent and many of you seem to take to much pleasure in seeing him as innocent.
All i am saying is can't you see some sort of responsibility on the defendants part? Some culpability on his part? Nope, not you guys. Other guy brought fists to a gunfight right? If you feel threatend you can kill in Florida, ITS THE LAW!

I am just saying this all seems so wrong, and i am a little disturbed how this is turned around on the internet all the time.
Someone died, it bothers me, but wanting something done makes me an emotional Demagogue? However most of you defending all sorts of people to the letter of the law makes you.......Naive maybe?
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
Vaclav_sl said:
It's a question of motivation and how he confronted - if someone is ignoring protocol on one side, why should you expect them to obey protocol on "not being aggressive", "not showing a weapon" or other if's that might have occurred?
Click to expand...
Unless you can show that he violently confronted virtually all prior suspects, it's not a pattern of behavior. Juries aren't allowed to draw inferences about behavior based on past behavior UNLESS its meets the test for a pattern/habit. Which this doesn't even come close to.

"He isn't generally a law abiding guy" => "therefore he committed this crime that I have no evidence of" = impermissible inference. That is no kind of evidence of any crime. And therefore generally irrelevant. You're just trying to say he's guilty by character smear.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Vaclav_sl said:
It's a question of motivation and how he confronted - if someone is ignoring protocol on one side, why should you expect them to obey protocol on "not being aggressive", "not showing a weapon" or other if's that might have occurred?

He's breaking rules on one thing, but he's expected to stick to the letter of the law on another? Possible, but doesn't feel likely to me.
Click to expand...
The police suggested earlier that he should get a gun, in relation to calls about pit bulls. Also, he did report and to our knowledge never went to confront him. So yeah, contrary to what you said, he was in the NW watch and pretty much followed protocol. Now normally NW protocol doesn't carry a gun, but as a citizen you are allowed to do so and he had a CC permit.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
hootie_sl said:
You folks are letting some strange law in florida get the best of you. My post wasn't about racism or what i think the will be the end result of the trial. I'm just really sick of some of you defending the law, guns and all the facts in the case that will probably let a murderer walk free. I'm not not trying to be rational or dissect this case with the cold anonymous logic like some of you internet lawyers. I'm also not trying to create a virtual lynchmob here on this message board.

I am only here to state that in this case we know who the killer was, this isn't OJ. I just really want to say i think its wrong, and i want to know what other posters think. You can candidly point out how righteous you are for believeing in the justice system and the absolute nature of an acquittal. If you remember i said i don't believe in things being black or white, most are grey. What i mean is the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Most of you keep talking about the outcome of the trial like you know for sure that defending himself with lethal force is the only choice Zimmerman had and if it was the law protects him.

First why do some of you seem so sure this is what happened? Second why do some of you seem to enjoy pointing this out to everyone who has a different opinion? And finnally, why are so many of you alright with this?
Do you want to get shot randomly walking down the street someday and your killer go free? Oh wait , this will never happen to you or your family.



This is my favorite quote from above because you admit that if Zimmerman attacked martin he is a,Quote " Fucked up individual/murderer". You say this to prove that your not defending Zimmerman, your defending the system and if he is a murderer you would judge him just as swiftly as i am. However, we have NO evidence that he is a murderer, you say. I am saying we have a dead body and we know who shot him, again its black and white with you guys. He is either guilty or innocent and many of you seem to take to much pleasure in seeing him as innocent.
All i am saying is can't you see some sort of responsibility on the defendants part? Some culpability on his part? Nope, not you guys. Other guy brought fists to a gunfight right? If you feel threatend you can kill in Florida, ITS THE LAW!

I am just saying this all seems so wrong, and i am a little disturbed how this is turned around on the internet all the time.
Someone died, it bothers me, but wanting something done makes me an emotional Demagogue? However most of you defending all sorts of people to the letter of the law makes you.......Naive maybe?
Click to expand...
You keep saying "murderer". I don't think that means what you think it means.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
I dunno, I just can't separate what I would do from what Zimmerman had done.

Your neighborhood has a history of breakins and crime. You have just helped bust one person for breaking and entering. You see someone in your neighborhood that you have never seen before. Your fucking right I would follow him and probably call a non-emergency number if I had it. If Trayvon hadn't decided to start a fight with someone following him, like any reasonable person would have done, nothing would have happened and everyone would have lived.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,791
213,131
This guy has had a permit to carry for 3 years. He was a nighborhood watch for some time and reported similar incidents of strange people lurking around houses, some of them black. In none of those cases did zimmerman go after them with his gun. In none of those cases did he profile anyone. So why in this case a zimmerman a creepy ass cracker looking to kill a negro? It makes no damned sense any other way except that he was attacked and used his firearm to defend himself. Stop using the fucking race card and learn some common sense.
 
Vaclav

Vaclav

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
12,650
877
hodj_sl said:
Its already been shown that when asked by the 911 operator, Zimmerman stopped pursuing Martin, and never actively pursued him beyond about 20 yards anyway.
Click to expand...
"Don't pursue" is not "stay back" it's don't pursue.

I've been quoted by the folks at Wilmer (eye section of John's Hopkins) as being in the top 0.1% for vision that Wilmer has seen [Dr. Maumanee actually quoted BEST period - but my replacement since her retirement is less bold] and
And the police advising someone not to pursue long before the event has no legal bearing on the situation, either. That's an insurance thing. They can't tell citizens to pursue and apprehend a criminal, because they'll get sued if something happens.
Click to expand...
Legal bearing, of course not - show him to be someone that doesn't give a shit about rules when it comes to his overzealous protection of his neighborhood though, sure.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,501
50,689
hootie_sl said:
You folks are letting some strange law in florida get the best of you. My post wasn't about racism or what i think the will be the end result of the trial. I'm just really sick of some of you defending the law, guns and all the facts in the case that will probably let a murderer walk free. I'm not not trying to be rational or dissect this case with the cold anonymous logic like some of you internet lawyers. I'm also not trying to create a virtual lynchmob here on this message board.

I am only here to state that in this case we know who the killer was, this isn't OJ. I just really want to say i think its wrong, and i want to know what other posters think. You can candidly point out how righteous you are for believeing in the justice system and the absolute nature of an acquittal. If you remember i said i don't believe in things being black or white, most are grey. What i mean is the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Most of you keep talking about the outcome of the trial like you know for sure that defending himself with lethal force is the only choice Zimmerman had and if it was the law protects him.

First why do some of you seem so sure this is what happened? Second why do some of you seem to enjoy pointing this out to everyone who has a different opinion? And finnally, why are so many of you alright with this?
Do you want to get shot randomly walking down the street someday and your killer go free? Oh wait , this will never happen to you or your family.



This is my favorite quote from above because you admit that if Zimmerman attacked martin he is a,Quote " Fucked up individual/murderer". You say this to prove that your not defending Zimmerman, your defending the system and if he is a murderer you would judge him just as swiftly as i am. However, we have NO evidence that he is a murderer, you say. I am saying we have a dead body and we know who shot him, again its black and white with you guys. He is either guilty or innocent and many of you seem to take to much pleasure in seeing him as innocent.
All i am saying is can't you see some sort of responsibility on the defendants part? Some culpability on his part? Nope, not you guys. Other guy brought fists to a gunfight right? If you feel threatend you can kill in Florida, ITS THE LAW!

I am just saying this all seems so wrong, and i am a little disturbed how this is turned around on the internet all the time.
Someone died, it bothers me, but wanting something done makes me an emotional Demagogue? However most of you defending all sorts of people to the letter of the law makes you.......Naive maybe?
Click to expand...
Every post you make gets more and more stupid.

Taking a life is not always wrong. Legally OR morally.
 
Vaclav

Vaclav

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
12,650
877
khalid_sl said:
The police suggested earlier that he should get a gun, in relation to calls about pit bulls. Also, he did report and to our knowledge never went to confront him. So yeah, contrary to what you said, he was in the NW watch and pretty much followed protocol. Now normally NW protocol doesn't carry a gun, but as a citizen you are allowed to do so and he had a CC permit.
Click to expand...
NW protocol absolutely states a GUN SHOULD NOT BE CARRIED. And under his own statements he confronted him (in addition to the retarded girlfriend) - so unless we're not even believing Zimmerman now...
 
Vaclav

Vaclav

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
12,650
877
Maester Chuk_sl said:
This guy has had a permit to carry for 3 years. He was a nighborhood watch for some time and reported similar incidents of strange people lurking around houses, some of them black. In none of those cases did zimmerman go after them with his gun. In none of those cases did he profile anyone. So why in this case a zimmerman a creepy ass cracker looking to kill a negro? It makes no damned sense any other way except that he was attacked and used his firearm to defend himself. Stop using the fucking race card and learn some common sense.
Click to expand...
Likely there was a Trayvon part to it, absolutely - but as they say two wrongs don't make a right - Zimmerman absolutely did a number of things wrong (against protocol and instruction). [Frankly, I don't even feel "manslaughter" myself - like reckless endangerment and a ban for life from NW functions seems the most appropo to me - his overzealousness and carrying a gun in a situation he's not supposed to combined with ignoring protocol was going to lead to something like this eventually]
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
hootie_sl said:
You folks are letting some strange law in florida get the best of you. My post wasn't about racism or what i think the will be the end result of the trial. I'm just really sick of some of you defending the law, guns and all the facts in the case that will probably let a murderer walk free. I'm not not trying to be rational or dissect this case with the cold anonymous logic like some of you internet lawyers. I'm also not trying to create a virtual lynchmob here on this message board.

I am only here to state that in this case we know who the killer was, this isn't OJ. I just really want to say i think its wrong, and i want to know what other posters think. You can candidly point out how righteous you are for believeing in the justice system and the absolute nature of an acquittal. If you remember i said i don't believe in things being black or white, most are grey. What i mean is the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Most of you keep talking about the outcome of the trial like you know for sure that defending himself with lethal force is the only choice Zimmerman had and if it was the law protects him.

First why do some of you seem so sure this is what happened? Second why do some of you seem to enjoy pointing this out to everyone who has a different opinion? And finnally, why are so many of you alright with this?
Do you want to get shot randomly walking down the street someday and your killer go free? Oh wait , this will never happen to you or your family.



This is my favorite quote from above because you admit that if Zimmerman attacked martin he is a,Quote " Fucked up individual/murderer". You say this to prove that your not defending Zimmerman, your defending the system and if he is a murderer you would judge him just as swiftly as i am. However, we have NO evidence that he is a murderer, you say. I am saying we have a dead body and we know who shot him, again its black and white with you guys. He is either guilty or innocent and many of you seem to take to much pleasure in seeing him as innocent.
All i am saying is can't you see some sort of responsibility on the defendants part? Some culpability on his part? Nope, not you guys. Other guy brought fists to a gunfight right? If you feel threatend you can kill in Florida, ITS THE LAW!

I am just saying this all seems so wrong, and i am a little disturbed how this is turned around on the internet all the time.
Someone died, it bothers me, but wanting something done makes me an emotional Demagogue? However most of you defending all sorts of people to the letter of the law makes you.......Naive maybe?
Click to expand...
rrr_img_33364.gif
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,501
50,689
Vaclav_sl said:
NW protocol absolutely states a GUN SHOULD NOT BE CARRIED.
Click to expand...
Patrol members should be trained by law enforcement.It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers and they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles.They should also be cautioned to alert police or deputies when encountering strange activity. Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous. Patrol members can be equipped for their duties. For example, flashlights or searchlights are necessary for night patrols. Many mobile patrols use cell phones or two-wayradios to contact a citizen-manned base station, which in turn contacts law enforcement officials when necessary. Remember your partnerships and ask for donations from local businesses.
Click to expand...
Within the context, it seems clear to me the protocol is written in such a way as to make it clear that being a member of the Neighborhood Watch does not give you special authority to carry weapons or act as a law enforcement official. These protocols do not say that someone who is legally authorized to carry a weapon is not permitted to carry one while acting as a member of the Neighborhood Watch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.