The Glade 4.0

I only mention the THC thing as it just came out today. Could it have had an effect on Martin's demenor at the time? Yes/No.

Nope, my train is firmly on the tracks moving at a high rate of speed. Maybe you just aren't holding on well enough while stowing away in the boxcar.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

What was suspicious? He was walking on the sidewalk in a residential neighborhood at 7:00 in the evening. It was raining a bit and he had his hood up. What is even remotely suspicious (let alone the picture of suspicion) about any of that?


It's the suspicion that's racially motivated, not the shooting. In a nutshell, there was nothing suspicious about Martin other than the fact he fit Zimmerman's mental image of a criminal, and "black" was part of that mental image.

Suspicion is in the eye of the beholder. You can't simply select a few innocuous facts and then say it's not supposed to be suspicious to someone else.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

RangerDave:

You have quoted me completely out of context. Please reread what I posted.

EDIT - Rather, to save you the trouble of figuring what I am trying to say...I said that "According to the guidelines outlined in a manual dedicated to training neighborhood watchmen that Hopwin posted...(Which I even requoted with bolding of the part I was referring to)

...What Trayvon was doing was the picture of suspicion.

Also, What Diamondeye said in response. Suspicion is in the eye of the beholder at that time. Not in the eyes of the media months after the fact when all the details of the incident have been released to the public. Do you think that ZImmerman KNEW that Trayvon was only "armed" with an Arizona Iced tea and Skittles. The media sure likes to portray that he obviously knew that and shot him anyway.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Yet another reason why armed amateurs shouldn't be out patrolling the streets and following "suspects".

Well then let's carry your argument to it's conclusion. If it is your responsibility to confront/detain/follow someone who you suspect of having shady motives then seeing someone actually in the commission of a crime surely trumps "suspicion"?

Here are a few quick examples:
If you saw a guy shoplifting then you should confront/detain/follow the person until police arrived to take over the situation.

If you saw a guy shoot someone down in the street then you should confront/detain/follow the person until police arrived to take over the situation.

If you were in a bank being robbed, you should confront/detain/follow the bank robbers until police arrived and could take over the situation.

_________________

Edit: Just saw your explanatory edit; thanks. I understand now that you're saying Martin was the picture of suspicion according to the manual, not in your own personal opinion. I still disagree, though. Nothing about what Martin was doing was out of place or occurring at an unusual time of day. He was walking in a residential neighborhood at 7pm with his hood up against a light rain.

See my edit above...

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Whether they should be or shouldn't be is irrelevant.

Zimmerman does not have to have a "legitimate" reason to be suspicious, he does not have to follow neighborhood watch parameters, he does not have to avoid "following" anyone (whether or not he was running, which has not been demonstrated), nor does the fact that he was armed somehow bear on any of it unless there's evidence he was using his weapon to threaten Martin prior to the altercation.

None of those things are against the law, and regardless of how stupid or ill-advised Zimmerman's actions were, none of the criticisms of them speak to him doing anything that he was not within his rights to do. Your argument is the equivalent of blaming a rape victim for wearing slutty clothing in a bad neighborhood which is stupid but ultimately within her rights. The police dispatcher did not have any legal power to order him not to follow Martin (Dispatchers are usually not sworn officers and even a sworn officer could not have ordered him not to except insofar as it might have interfered with the officer himself investigating), and it is not against the law to not follow neighborhood watch guidelines.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

You already know the focus on this detail is basically irrelevant to the case, unless of course you can show that Zimmerman had 'racist' or malicious intentions (which I guess is the prosecution argument you've already decided to pursue). There is no evidence of such a motive on Zimmerman's part. And as for whether Trayvon's actions were 'suspicious', you conveniently skip over context. None of us were there and saw what Zimmerman did, and more importantly, none of us have had the many years long experience of neighborhood watch that he has, and none of us live in that particular neighborhood, or know the surroundings, or know what's typical and atypical of an individual's behavior in said neighborhood. But again, all of this is a distraction at best. There is no legal justification for assaulting and beating someone just because they followed you and approached you, whether they were 'suspicious' or not.

Depending on the risks and what you think you can handle, I don't see a problem with someone getting involved any any of those things.

Hey Hop, if you want sit things out and let things happen without getting involved...knock yourself out dude. Others might feel differently. Lot's of criminals count on the fear of others and not risk getting involved.

Just to bring it home...again, what exactly, not counting the actual shooting(which remains to be seen), did Zimmerman do that was illegal?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Good, then all that proves is that, were you in Zimmermen's shoes under the exact circumstances, you would have not given Trayvon Martin even a second glance, perhaps not even a first glance.

You are not GZ, though. Trayvon was suspicious to him (likely circumstantial, less likely racist)and as such he followed with his neighborhood watch duties, though as it seems now, a little overzealously.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Thing is too, there's no evidence that Zimmerman continued to follow and confront the guy. The investigator admitted as such in the bail hearing.

And listening to the 911 call Zimmerman made, when the dispatcher said he didn't have to follow, Zimmerman said "Okay", and it sounds like he slowed down. After that point, Zimmerman lost Trayvon and seemed worried about if he was still around. So there really is nothing there to indicate that Zimmerman confronted him.

My mom called it minding my own **** business. Since you live in a predominatly black neighborhood you and LK are the ones who appear suspicious and based on your statements the implication is that you would be totally cool with a someone following either of you around the block to see what you're up to.


Not a damn thing. He was just a nosey, stupid man and now someone is dead because he wouldn't mind his own **** business.

_________________

The lack of any objectively suspicious activity by Martin is evidence of Zimmerman having a racial bias. It's obviously not enough to convict someone of a hate crime or even to definitively conclude that his suspicions were partially due to racial bias, but it's enough for me to raise my eyebrow in that direction. And yes, there could be a thousand different things that Martin was doing that might have raised suspicions, but the basic facts of the situation suggest there was no suspicious behavior, so it's on Zimmerman to present contrary evidence if he wants it to be considered. "I don't know, man, he just seemed suspicious to me" is not a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Why do you think it's less likely to be a racial thing?

We've moved, have so for a year now. Try to keep up.

Well at least you admit that…though I would say Zim was doing what he thought was best for his community and that had Martin not been the stupid one and attacked a guy who as far as we know didn’t threaten him, would still be alive(and just to set it straight, Martin is dead because he attacked Zim...not because Zim decided to follow him). What would your mom say about that?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Not really. Zimmerman lived in the gated community for years, and knew most everyone. There had just been a string of robberies by young blacks in the area (according to Zimmerman's black neighbor who made a statement in his defense), the timeline suggests Trayvon was walking rather slowly while in the rain.

So, he sees an unfamiliar person in a gated community, walking slowly in the rain, after a string of recent robberies...

Why do you think it's most likely a racial thing? And before you answer, please remember that Zim never mentioned his race until the police asked him to describe him.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

^ Also this.

I can't imagine that at night, in the rain you can easily tell someone's race, especially when they have their hood pulled up and you are sitting in your car. Hence the pause when the dispatcher asked the race of the subject (I am assuming he had to peer at him to figure it out or the response would've been immediate).

_________________

And not only that, the dispatcher specifically asked what race he was before Zimmerman said "He looks black."

Based on what has been said already. I am sorry I don't remember where exactly, since there has been ridiculous amounts of information and articles on this story.

It was said that this was an area that had been subject to burglaries before. I believe that Zimmerman was acting on the "lone dude in the dark of night in a previously burgled (is that a word?) area" suspicion, rather than "Hey, that dude is black...I'm calling the cops."



Unless GZ was incredibly calculating in covering up his racist intentions when making the 911 call, that question and response looks to me that he hadn't necessarily taken notice that TM was black until he was specifically asked by the dispatcher to identify the "suspect's" race.

EDIT - DAMN! Ninjaed by the Fox, Hopwin and Coren. Yeah, what they said.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Let's also throw for Zim's defense that he did some kind of neighborhood thing for this homeless black guy that had been roughed up by the police in he past.

Sorry, but the race angle is weak at best. Though given the political and social leanings of the folks intent on making it the focus, not surprising.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

The issue isn't whether Zimmerman's actions leading up to the shooting were illegal; the issue is whether Zimmerman "initially provoked the use of force against himself...", to quote the Florida statute, which would prevent him from claiming self-defense unless he (i) reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and he had exhausted every other reasonable means of escape or (ii) clearly indicated that he was withdrawing and Martin continued or resumed the use of force against him. In short, even if Zimmerman's pre-struggle actions weren't illegal, they might have been sufficiently provocative to raise the bar on his ability to claim a self-defense justification for the subsequent shooting.

You really belive that? If he wanted to shoot him, it would seem he would have done so when he was following or chasing him. Zim stopped because he lost Martin. Martin was home free. Martin came back. Martin commited the first illegal act by assulting Zim. Zim cried out for help a number of times BEFORE he shot him. The logic doesn't bear it out.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."