I Told You So!

[art leong]

Eddie you make it sound like this was a targeted hit.
Everyone agrees Trayon should not have been killed. He was not breaking the law.
But by the same token Zimmerman might not have broken any law either. It is not against the law to disregard a 911 operator. They are not law enforcement, they are phone operators.
It is not against the law to follow someone. Even if the 911 operator said not to.
The police have had all this "new" info since the day this happened. That is probably why they didn't charge him at the time.
Now there is rumors of a federal hate crime charge.
This is just mob mentality, looking for revenge.
I believe (looking at the evidence the media has put out) that he won't even go to trial.
Or if he does he'll be aquitted.

I for one am sick and tired of the double standard. If a white or straight, or "rich" person has a problem with a person of color, or a non hetrosexual, or poor person It is called a hate crime.
But if it's the other way around it's just an assault or a mugging.
The assault a couple a weeks ago in Norfolk Va was a prime example. A mob of Black men surrounds a car with 2 white peolple. 5 of them beat the man and woman severly enough to cause over a weeks absence from work.The only station that had the guts to report on it was Fox.
Where was "your" reverend al or jesse? Where is the DOJ on this one. Did the man and woman have any civil rights?

[Eddies66]

Originally Posted by art leong

Eddie you make it sound like this was a targeted hit.
Everyone agrees Trayon should not have been killed. He was not breaking the law.
But by the same token Zimmerman might not have broken any law either. It is not against the law to disregard a 911 operator. They are not law enforcement, they are phone operators.
It is not against the law to follow someone. Even if the 911 operator said not to.
The police have had all this "new" info since the day this happened. That is probably why they didn't charge him at the time.
Now there is rumors of a federal hate crime charge.
This is just mob mentality, looking for revenge.
I believe (looking at the evidence the media has put out) that he won't even go to trial.
Or if he does he'll be aquitted.

I for one am sick and tired of the double standard. If a white or straight, or "rich" person has a problem with a person of color, or a non hetrosexual, or poor person It is called a hate crime.
But if it's the other way around it's just an assault or a mugging.
The assault a couple a weeks ago in Norfolk Va was a prime example. A mob of Black men surrounds a car with 2 white peolple. 5 of them beat the man and woman severly enough to cause over a weeks absence from work.The only station that had the guts to report on it was Fox.
Where was "your" reverend al or jesse? Where is the DOJ on this one. Did the man and woman have any civil rights?

Your last paragraph and a half has no relevance to me, I really don't care what Al or Jessie have to say. My point is the poor investigative actions by the Stanford police that will lead to an acquital because the police "might not have done there jobs". Many on this site will say that if Mr. Zimmerman goes to jail that it will impose on our rights for self protection. Again that is not the focus. Police are limited in approaching stranger unless there is probable cause. Mr. Zimmerman is not trained to be a policeman. He was carrying a gun. Mr. Martin was a young black man in the wrong neighborhood. He did not deserve to die. For Mr. Martin’s life to have any meaning, a message has to be sent. Neighborhood watch is not for confronting. It is there to observe and report it to the police who are trained in confrontation. If you want to confront then don't carry a gun around. Nobody has the right to shoot an unarmed person even if the shooter is afraid.

As far as people saying that Mr. Zimmerman's injuries support his defense that he had to defend himself, that correlation cannot be made. His victim was most likely the one trying to defend himself. If someone chased me down with a gun you better believe I would fight for my life, and there is a strong likelihood based on what we know and the fact that Mr. Martin was aggressively pursued (against police instructions), that might be exactly what happened. Mr. Zimmerman being beat up may only confirm the threat that Mr. Martin felt, having no idea this guy was a neighborhood watchman but only knowing he was pursuing him with a gun. I can't imagine any of us would feel otherwise if we were in his situation.

Justice, whatever that may be in this case, might never come though because the police from the moment they arrived, didn't take this murder investigation seriously enough. Just my opinion!

[Alan Roehrich]

Yeah, because it is always smart, the right thing to do, and legal, to confront someone you think is following you.

The complete lack of logic in some of these posts is amazing.

So is the number and level of assumptions.

Who says Martin's life is supposed to "have meaning"?

Is the life of every criminal who is killed during the commission of a crime supposed to "have meaning"? Yeah, assault is a crime.

It is every bit as likely that the incident went exactly as Zimmerman says it did. It is entirely possible that Zimmerman was returning to his car, Martin confronted him, attacked him, and he shot Martin to keep Martin from continuing to bash his head into the concrete sidewalk. That is, by the way, legal and proper use of lethal force in most every state in the union.

You, Eddie, have convicted Zimmerman without first hand knowledge of any evidence, with nothing more than assumptions. You do not know if anything you have posted is even remotely true. And then you go further and attempt to crucify the police, who were actually there, as being incompetent, or worse, corrupt.

Yet Martin, who was sent to stay with his father because he would not stay out of trouble and obey his mother, you portray as being as pure as the driven snow, despite evidence to the contrary. Namely his criminal activity that got him in trouble and sent to stay with his father to begin with.

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by Eddies66

Your last paragraph and a half has no relevance to me, I really don't care what Al or Jessie have to say. My point is the poor investigative actions by the Stanford police that will lead to an acquital because the police "might not have done there jobs". Many on this site will say that if Mr. Zimmerman goes to jail that it will impose on our rights for self protection. Again that is not the focus. Police are limited in approaching stranger unless there is probable cause. Mr. Zimmerman is not trained to be a policeman. He was carrying a gun. Mr. Martin was a young black man in the wrong neighborhood. He did not deserve to die. For Mr. Martin’s life to have any meaning, a message has to be sent. Neighborhood watch is not for confronting. It is there to observe and report it to the police who are trained in confrontation. If you want to confront then don't carry a gun around. Nobody has the right to shoot an unarmed person even if the shooter is afraid.

As far as people saying that Mr. Zimmerman's injuries support his defense that he had to defend himself, that correlation cannot be made. His victim was most likely the one trying to defend himself. If someone chased me down with a gun you better believe I would fight for my life, and there is a strong likelihood based on what we know and the fact that Mr. Martin was aggressively pursued (against police instructions), that might be exactly what happened. Mr. Zimmerman being beat up may only confirm the threat that Mr. Martin felt, having no idea this guy was a neighborhood watchman but only knowing he was pursuing him with a gun. I can't imagine any of us would feel otherwise if we were in his situation.

Justice, whatever that may be in this case, might never come though because the police from the moment they arrived, didn't take this murder investigation seriously enough. Just my opinion!

This is so full of nonsense and conjecture, I won't waste much time with it...

One quick example:

" If someone chased me down with a gun you better believe I would fight for my life, "


You have NO evidence of this ever happening in this case.... NONE!

[Randall Klein]

For the life of me, I can't understand why the media hasn't posted a cute baby picture of Martin, rather than the semi-angelic photo of a young Martin or the more recent picture that is closer to reality

[Eddies66]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

This is so full of nonsense and conjecture, I won't waste much time with it...

One quick example:

" If someone chased me down with a gun you better believe I would fight for my life, "


You have NO evidence of this ever happening in this case.... NONE!

The only one that can answer for that 8 minutes is Zimmerman and he ain't talking. And you have NO evidence to the contrary.....NONE!

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by Eddies66

The only one that can answer for that 8 minutes is Zimmerman and he ain't talking. And you have NO evidence to the contrary.....NONE!

...And YOU are taking sides and trying the case in public...I am not!

[Eddies66]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

...And YOU are taking sides and trying the case in public...I am not!

The only side I am taking is the one that offers "liberty and justice for all"

[art leong]

Eddie.
You talk about a lot of stuff that sounds good to you but has absolutly no basis in law.
Fact. Under the Florida stand your ground law the person that confronts you does not have to be armed. So yes it is legal to shoot an unarmed person. If he was attacked he had every right to shoot.
Zimmerman was not breaking any law by carrying the gun.
The rest of the country does not have to comply with your california justice system.
I wasn't there. But neither were you. So let this play out in the courts and we will see what really went on.

And you should add to your list. The autopsy showed Trayvon had cuts on his knuckles similar to those someone would get from punching someone.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Eddies66

The only side I am taking is the one that offers "liberty and justice for all"

Yeah. Hearsay evidence, from one side, little if any of it actually verified, and most of it edited.

You really like to leave out facts you don't like. Such as, when advised by the dispatcher "we don't need you to do that", you and the "Orlando Sentinel" conveniently leave out the part where Zimmerman replied "Okay". There is no evidence Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after that. None.

You conveniently, again, leave out the part where Martin was sent to stay with his father because his mother could not get him to behave. And the part where he was in trouble at school, for either theft or vandalism, or both.

No, what you want is not justice. If you wanted justice, you would not attempt to try Zimmerman and the police in the court of public opinion, with no evidence of your own, and no verified evidence at all.