Feds opening investigation into Florida teen killing

Cellos88GT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
4,004
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Car(s)
2 Fox Mustangs and a '00 VFR
Wow Firecat, that's a great point, which honestly had not occurred to me, but it seems obvious now.
That's something I would love to know more about, or even hear any conjecture on your guys part. I can't begin to guess the motivation of white racists. I can understand perhaps, being afraid of a group identity, which is what I have inarticulately tried to describe here. Just as I'm not afraid of bald guys, but throw in a pair of red suspenders and Doc Martens, and I do a head count and look for easy exits, which I tried to justify here.
White Power has to be a learned behavior. Like a blind adherence to a sports team, a religion, or a political group, that is trained from infancy. Gangs on the other hand are probably a survival mechanism, a way of narrowing down who whips your butt, and a support system in an unforgiving and hostile environment.

Have you seen 'American History X'? It can clue one in to a degree but it is by no means the definition of how one gets caught into the mentality of white supremacy. However, you can really just trace it down to a fundamental lack of understanding or education for some it's a religion.
 

_HighVoltage_

Captain Volvo
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
9,964
Car(s)
1998 Volvo S70 T5M
What the fuck?

George Zimmerman found not guilty

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/13/george-zimmerman-found-not-guilty/2514163/

SANFORD, Fla. -- George Zimmerman, the man accused of murdering Trayvon Martin, was found not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter Saturday night.

The verdict is the culmination of a case that captured the nation's attention and will undoubtedly be imprinted in America's history. For Zimmerman, it means trying to recapture his life after he was at the center of a national maelstrom over racial profiling, state gun laws and what constitutes self-defense.

The not guilty verdict means the jury of six women found that Zimmerman justifiably used deadly force and reasonably believed that such force was "necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm" to himself ? Florida's definition of self-defense.

Zimmerman showed no emotion as the verdict was read. After the verdict was read, he smiled slightly and shook hands with one of his lawyers.

The unidentified jurors decided Zimmerman didn't "intentionally commit an act or acts that caused death" or demonstrate a "depraved mind without regard for human life" -- Florida's definitions of manslaughter and second-degree murder, respectively.

In a press conference after the verdict, Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara said his client will now need to get on with his life.

...

Really? Not guilty of anything?

As the prosecuting attorney rightly asked - who was following who? It doesn't matter if Martin hit Zimmerman or not - Zimmerman started it - he was too paranoid because he was a black kid with a hoodie walking around and started chasing him. Couldn't they at least find him guilty of racial profiling, so that there would be at least a modicum of justice?

We've had discussions like this before and if I remember correctly, many people believe that if you feel threatened for your life you are allowed to ready your gun or react in self-defense. Didn't Martin react in self-defense? Zimmerman had no business chasing him or taunting him in the first place.
 
Last edited:

rickhamilton620

has a fetish for terrible cars
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
16,837
Location
Yoe, PA
Car(s)
2012 Kia Forte EX
From what i've read/watched, the prosecution team was pretty lackluster overall in convincing the jury otherwise despite having many reasons they could have used but didn't.
 

jasonof2000

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Messages
1,937
Location
Delmarva Peninsula
Car(s)
2013 Lincoln MKT, 2002 Miata SE, 2012 Honda NC700
This was the prosecutions to lose and they did. Their were two jurors they didn't want on but the defense over ruled them, and those two knew the prosecution wanted no part of them on the jury.

I'm surprised Florida isn't on fire yet (I'm glad it isn't though).
 

Aston Martin

Proudly supports terrible french cars
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
15,635
Location
Hull, England
Car(s)
Cactus and Panda Classic
I know nothing about this case, apart from what I saw on the news this morning.
What if it was a black man shooting a white kid?
 

jasonof2000

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Messages
1,937
Location
Delmarva Peninsula
Car(s)
2013 Lincoln MKT, 2002 Miata SE, 2012 Honda NC700
Zimmerman is Hispanic, not white but your point stands.
 

Wizegui

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
2,466
Location
Richmond, BC
Car(s)
'93 Toyota Tercel, '01 Swagger Wagon

calvinhobbes

Forum Addict
DONOR
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
6,529
Location
near Cologne
Good grief! Reading that made me feel like I was at a KKK meeting. :barf:

Anyway, it may be a case of selective reporting, but race is far from the only factor that can make a story go on and on forever. Otherwise nobody would have cared about Madeleine McCann, Natalee Holloway, Meredith Kercher, Reeva Steenkamp and so on - there simply is no "Lord of the News" who decides which stories will stick and which won't, that's a dynamic process.
 

_HighVoltage_

Captain Volvo
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
9,964
Car(s)
1998 Volvo S70 T5M
I think if the roles were reversed, this story would have blown the Trayvon Martin case out of the waters. This is just another of the media's selective reporting.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/12/why-is-joshua-chellew-less-important-than-trayvon-martin/

This is the biggest load of crap I've read all day.

1) Criminals exist regardless of skin color. No one is saying that the teenagers in this case did not commit a crime. People are outraged by the fact that Zimmerman was found not guilty. The article is comparing apples and oranges - "look, black people killed a white man, therefore Zimmerman was not guilty of killing a black teenager." Bull shit. Cases should be judged individually, which leads me to my next point.
2) The titles of the images of the suspects - "If_Obama_had_a_son_01.jpg" What? They don't have names? No, the author is suggesting that all black men look alike. Not only that, he implies that all of them are criminals, and adds a "nice" touch of also implicitly blaming the President. One could easily counteract and say that they killed a generic white male, who was ginger on top of everything.

But the biggest downfall is this "if Chellew had been able to defend himself against one or all of them, he?d be the new George Zimmerman." That is just blatant ignorance of the facts. Zimmerman did not defend himself against an attack - he initiated the attack.

What is really disgusting is that conservatives are trying to make this political. They want to blame Obama even in a case that has nothing to do with him, but in an allegedly non-racist way connect it to him because...guess what...his race.

Watch this drivel.
[video]http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/14/ann-coulter-slams-media-mississippi-burning-narrative-after-zimmerman-verdict/[/video]

I'm not going to comment on the entire video because that will probably take hours, but I wanted to slap her at the very beginning when she said "It is not against the law for a private individual to follow another individual..." Oh, really? Well, then I guess every woman who used mace/pepper spray/other device to escape a stalker was actually committing a crime, because I guess stalking is not against the law - just a private individual following another.
 

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
Zimmerman got off because the defence made concrete into a weapon. Yes, the common building material is a deadly object. A low point in American law, I admit.

So forcefully bouncing someone's head off concrete repeatedly while kneeling on their chest is a harmless activity?
 
Last edited:

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,266
No one said Zimmerman did not racially profile and/or murder Martin in cold blood. However, the jury decided that there was not enough evidence to convict. Under US law, the defendant gets the benefit of the doubt. None of us here know what happened that day so stop defending either one of them. The mere fact that we are discussing this case is evidence enough that this is all about race - no one bats an eyelid when one black kid shoots another black kid in South Side Chicago.
 

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
I would have thought he would have gotten Involuntary manslaughter.

Why? If you watched the trial, the prosecution's case was pretty much non-existent, and their own witnesses largely bore out Zimmerman's version of the story. One of the prosecution's key witnesses stated that he saw a man wearing a hoody matching Martin's description on top of a man wearing a red jacket (Zimmerman's clothing) in a "mixed martial arts" pose beating the crap out of the man in the red jacket and then pounding the red jacketed man's head into the concrete sidewalk. Shooting someone who is actively trying to shatter your skull and kill you is self-defense, not manslaughter.

Also, despite the 'innocent child' pictures the media circulated of Martin, the reality was that at the time of his death, Martin was a 6'2" 170 pound well muscled 17 year old with the build of a high school football player. Not some 5' tall 14 year old waif.

- - - Updated - - -

No one said Zimmerman did not racially profile and/or murder Martin in cold blood. However, the jury decided that there was not enough evidence to convict. Under US law, the defendant gets the benefit of the doubt. None of us here know what happened that day so stop defending either one of them. The mere fact that we are discussing this case is evidence enough that this is all about race - no one bats an eyelid when one black kid shoots another black kid in South Side Chicago.

Actually, the FBI themselves said this was not race related nor was there racial profiling involved. http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/07/13/zimmerman-not-racist-fbi-report-states/

Also, for those saying "He wasn't found guilty of ANYTHING??" - keep in mind that the prosecution chose to charge him with 2nd degree murder, with the included possibility of voluntary manslaughter. They did not present proof that either occurred, despite successfully withholding and suppressing evidence that would have instantly torpedoed their case. They even tried to get Child Abuse tacked on on the very last day but the judge denied that as being ridiculous (and it would be grounds for instant overturn on appeal). So the only options available to the jury were murder or manslaughter and he clearly wasn't guilty of *either* based on the evidence the prosecution itself presented. He might have been guilty of illegal detention or harassment - but the prosecution pulled the 'murder' lever with a case that didn't support it and they got the verdict they deserved.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TC

That American Girl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2009
Messages
4,581
Location
Columbus, Ohio
Car(s)
None, right now. Bye Bye Mustang. :-(
Why? If you watched the trial, the prosecution's case was pretty much non-existent, and their own witnesses largely bore out Zimmerman's version of the story. One of the prosecution's key witnesses stated that he saw a man wearing a hoody matching Martin's description on top of a man wearing a red jacket (Zimmerman's clothing) in a "mixed martial arts" pose beating the crap out of the man in the red jacket and then pounding the red jacketed man's head into the concrete sidewalk. Shooting someone who is actively trying to shatter your skull and kill you is self-defense, not manslaughter..

To be honest, I didn't really follow the case that much, so I'm going by the bits I remember.

From what I understand...Zimmerman was told not to keep following the kid by the police. If he had listened to them, he probably wouldn't have been in that situation. But, if the kid hadn't jumped him and started beating the holy hell out of him, he wouldn't have been shot. Sounds like a series of stupid decisions by both men.

I agree that he shot him in self defense. I guess my thinking is that while it was in self defence, he sort of put himself in the situation.

I think they both panicked, got in deeper than they realized or ever intended to..and a man ended up dead.

I don't think there was ever really a way to "win" for Zimmerman in the court room.
 
Last edited:

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
To be honest, I didn't really follow the case that much, so I'm going by the bits I remember.

From what I understand...Zimmerman was told not to keep following the kid by the police. If he had listened to them, he probably wouldn't have been in that situation. But, if the kid hadn't jumped him and started beating the holy hell out of him, he wouldn't have been shot. Sounds like a series of stupid decisions by both men.

I agree that he shot him in self defense. I guess my thinking is that while it was in self defence, he sort of put himself in the situation.

I think they both panicked, got in deeper than they realized or ever intended to..and a man ended up dead.

I don't think there was ever really a way to "win" for Zimmerman in the court room.

I did watch the trial, especially after it turned out the HE FOLLOWED HIM BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK OMG! 911 recording NBC broadcast had been heavily edited for shock value (and perhaps to suit their narrative). You know, the one they ran for a week? I often follow these things; I believe that self defense is something that should not be weakened by assholes hiding behind it for acts that truly weren't self defense. I like seeing people who do so hung out to dry. However, that's not what I saw in the trial (but the news coverage of the trial was ridiculously slanted!)

Zimmerman actually did stop following Martin about a minute after the police told him that they didn't need him to do that (because he had actually lost sight of him) and was returning to his car (per the unedited police dispatcher recordings) when Martin ambushed him. If Zimmerman had continued to follow him and confronted Martin, or Martin had turned around and confronted Zimmerman while the latter was still following him, you might have had a point. (See my prior comment on possible illegal detention or harassment.) Thing is, once Zimmerman made to leave, Martin had no right to accost him - and that made it an entirely new act.

My own state's law spells it out how this works very clearly; this is generally how self-defense law works in most states, but Texas has it spelled out pretty clearly (and it happens to be the one I have ready access to and the most familiarity with). I have bolded the appropriate section:

Code:
? 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE.  (a) Except as provided in 
Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against 
another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is 
immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or 
attempted use of unlawful force.
	(b)  The use of force against another is not justified:                        
		(1)  in response to verbal provocation alone;                                 
		(2)  to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows 
is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace 
officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or 
search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under 
Subsection (c);
		(3)  if the actor consented to the exact force used or 
attempted by the other;
		(4)  [B]if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted 
use of unlawful force, unless:[/B]
			(A)  [B]the actor abandons the encounter[/B], or clearly 
communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing 
he cannot safely abandon the encounter

If Martin had used force against Zimmerman in fear for his life while Zimmerman was actually following him, that would have been justifiable. But Zimmerman was clearly leaving and was going back to his vehicle when Martin attacked him. That is *not* justifiable at all, that is an unjustifiable assault on a man who had decided to leave.

By the way, per the 911 recordings (someone else called 911 after the ambush began), Martin was beating the crap out of Zimmerman on the ground for at least most of a minute before he was finally shot.
 
Last edited:

That American Girl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2009
Messages
4,581
Location
Columbus, Ohio
Car(s)
None, right now. Bye Bye Mustang. :-(
.......



By the way, per the 911 recordings (someone else called 911 after the ambush began), Martin was beating the crap out of Zimmerman on the ground for at least most of a minute before he was finally shot.

Ahh, gotcha. Like I said, I didn't really follow but if that's true, then I do see your point. :)
 

Cellos88GT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
4,004
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Car(s)
2 Fox Mustangs and a '00 VFR
The whole thing is frustrating, even though I knew Zimmerman would not be found guilty per the lovely inane laws of FL. That being said, Zimmerman deserves reprimand for being an over-zealous neighborhood watch volunteer, the actions he took, caused an innocent free citizen, his life.
 

_HighVoltage_

Captain Volvo
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
9,964
Car(s)
1998 Volvo S70 T5M
I did watch the trial, especially after it turned out the HE FOLLOWED HIM BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK OMG! 911 recording NBC broadcast had been heavily edited for shock value (and perhaps to suit their narrative). You know, the one they ran for a week? I often follow these things; I believe that self defense is something that should not be weakened by assholes hiding behind it for acts that truly weren't self defense. I like seeing people who do so hung out to dry. However, that's not what I saw in the trial (but the news coverage of the trial was ridiculously slanted!)

Zimmerman actually did stop following Martin about a minute after the police told him that they didn't need him to do that (because he had actually lost sight of him) and was returning to his car (per the unedited police dispatcher recordings) when Martin ambushed him. If Zimmerman had continued to follow him and confronted Martin, or Martin had turned around and confronted Zimmerman while the latter was still following him, you might have had a point. (See my prior comment on possible illegal detention or harassment.) Thing is, once Zimmerman made to leave, Martin had no right to accost him - and that made it an entirely new act.

...

If Martin had used force against Zimmerman in fear for his life while Zimmerman was actually following him, that would have been justifiable. But Zimmerman was clearly leaving and was going back to his vehicle when Martin attacked him. That is *not* justifiable at all, that is an unjustifiable assault on a man who had decided to leave.

By the way, per the 911 recordings (someone else called 911 after the ambush began), Martin was beating the crap out of Zimmerman on the ground for at least most of a minute before he was finally shot.

I don't think it was an entirely new act. Don't forget that it was Zimmerman who started it all. And while the coverage might have been slanted, Zimmerman did follow Martin because he was black! I seriously doubt he would have followed my pale white ass had I been casually walking around the neighborhood. He automatically accused him of a crime - walking-while-black. So what that there have been a dozen burglaries in the past - does that mean that you should question every black man walking in the neighborhood?

Maybe Martin didn't handle the situation well, maybe he shouldn't have attacked Zimmerman. It doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman instigated the entire incident. And the size of Martin is a side issue - it doesn't change the fact that he was a teenager with a teenager's mind. When I was a teenager I was always taught to be aware of strangers. So as a teenager you see a middle-aged man following you around - how do you react? Let's not rule out the possibility that Martin may indeed have been scared for his life.

We can argue about the laws, and what might have happened but in the end, I think Cellos88GT hit it spot on.

The whole thing is frustrating, even though I knew Zimmerman would not be found guilty per the lovely inane laws of FL. That being said, Zimmerman deserves reprimand for being an over-zealous neighborhood watch volunteer, the actions he took, caused an innocent free citizen, his life.

Similarly over-zealous neighborhood watch volunteers might get the wrong message from the result of the trial - it's okay to target black people, chase them around the neighborhood, and if they attack you, you shoot them, claim self defense, find out they were completely innocent...oh well, nevermind - who knows - maybe the next one will be a criminal, carry on.

Maybe Zimmerman didn't deserve to be charged with manslaughter, but to be found absolutely innocent and freed after killing an innocent teenager? It sounds like the court patted him on the back and said "Oh well, shit happens."
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
21,278
Location
Michigan USA
The whole thing is frustrating, even though I knew Zimmerman would not be found guilty per the lovely inane laws of FL. That being said, Zimmerman deserves reprimand for being an over-zealous neighborhood watch volunteer, the actions he took, caused an innocent free citizen, his life.


I didn't watch the circus, did any of the other neighborhood watch people testify on Zimmerman's character?
 
Top