Trayvon Martin

[Nordling]

"The Trayvon Martin case has exposed some of the media's worst tendencies--selective editing, rushing to judgment, stoking anger for ratings and page views--"

...much the same as here.... You folks have given this thing a life of its own. Innocent men, boys, women, girls, children of every age, race, religious affiliation and location are wrongly killed every single day of every single year. Those deaths are all tragedy's yet you seldom hear more than a day or 2 mention of them. This kid is no different than those others yet you'd think the existence of the world itself is hinged on this one incident from the way its being hashed and rehashed ad nauseam. Once the investigation is complete, and all the facts are known and analyzed, then perhaps a clear picture will be visible. The truly sad thing is that no matter the source, the race card always seems to be "reason" for something.

:violence-duel: :violence-stickwhack: :violence-swords:

Race, interestingly, has hardly been talked about in this thread at all, so I'm not sure what you're referring to...the media? Okay.

The untimely death of any innocent person is always a terrible thing. It's impossible for us to give full attention to all of them--since there ARE so damn many. Trayvon Martin is symbolic, a case where all of the worst elements of a screwed up arrest have been made. Aside from a ratings hungry media, we have police misconduct, we have a states attorney getting up in the middle of the night to drive 50 miles to stop any proceedings or possible arrest--what other cases has this happened in? We have the father of the shooter being allowed to hang around during a police investigation with no equivalent representatives of the victim's family asked to to be there. We have a body allowed to remain "jon doe" for three days after his death.

I'd say there's lots to talk about. And yeah, a lot of it will be ignorant; a lot of it will be nonsense. But no one here's claiming to be an expert. But those of us posting are INTERESTED in this case. If you're not, that's fine too. Okay?

 

[Harvrath]

No one really knows what happened. I am unsure how there are "supporters" of Zimmerman when the truth and the facts of the case are not even determined. The only fact is Trayvon was not up to no good, had every right to be there and shouldn't have been pursued in the first place. What happened before he was shot is really speculation at this point.

The same goes for people who automatically condemn Zimmerman and support Trayvon. People are automatically assuming the worse about Zimmerman, including racism (which quickly ended when it became apparent that he is bi-racial which is hilarious because of the inherent racism of automatically assuming Zimmerman was white and therefore racist).

And the fact that Trayvon may or may not have warranted Zimmerman's scrutiny has excruciatingly little to do with whether or not Zimmerman's use of lethal force was justified under the law.

 

[Jupiter551]

No one really knows what happened. I am unsure how there are "supporters" of Zimmerman when the truth and the facts of the case are not even determined. The only fact is Trayvon was not up to no good, had every right to be there and shouldn't have been pursued in the first place. What happened before he was shot is really speculation at this point.

The same goes for people who automatically condemn Zimmerman and support Trayvon. People are automatically assuming the worse about Zimmerman, including racism (which quickly ended when it became apparent that he is bi-racial which is hilarious because of the inherent racism of automatically assuming Zimmerman was white and therefore racist).

And the fact that Trayvon may or may not have warranted Zimmerman's scrutiny has excruciatingly little to do with whether or not Zimmerman's use of lethal force was justified under the law.

No, the same doesn't go because Trayvon was shot by the dude There seems, to the public, to be far more chance of Zimmerman being in the wrong (it's a known fact he shot the kid dead) than Trayvon who we know was pursued, and have no concrete evidence of anything else.

Zimmerman was initially listed as Hispanic, it was only later that they pointed out his father is white.

 

[LadyLuna]

Zimmerman was initially listed as Hispanic, it was only later that they pointed out his father is white.

No wonder the "he was racist against blacks" card was played! Dunno about you guys, but I know plenty of places where the Hispanics and blacks have HUGE rivalries going on. Each always assumes the worst about the other.

Not saying I jumped to the "he was a racist" wagon, or that I would've if I'd known that. I'm only vaguely interested in this case. Mostly because I want to see how person A can pursue person B and still be in the right to shoot person B when person B wasn't doing anything wrong until after person A threatened.

 

[Jupiter551]

Zimmerman was initially listed as Hispanic, it was only later that they pointed out his father is white.

No wonder the "he was racist against blacks" card was played! Dunno about you guys, but I know plenty of places where the Hispanics and blacks have HUGE rivalries going on. Each always assumes the worst about the other.

Not saying I jumped to the "he was a racist" wagon, or that I would've if I'd known that. I'm only vaguely interested in this case. Mostly because I want to see how person A can pursue person B and still be in the right to shoot person B when person B wasn't doing anything wrong until after person A threatened.

I think the question was raised over certain things said on the police phonecall - and with the mumbled phrase, Zimmerman's explanation that a black man walking around at night in the rain (with a hoodie on mind you) was suspicious, must be on drugs etc, and that "these guys always get away with it". Which guys? Black guys? Guys walking around in the rain?

And then it came out that pretty much every neighbourhood watch email he sent around described suspicious people as "black males". Even his neighbour, who described Zimmerman as a fairly nice sort of guy claimed that because of the racial stereotyping he wasn't comfortable walking around his (own) neighbourhood. So yeah the racial question should be raised.

If Tray was shot for no reason at all then it would be an injustice no matter what race the people were, but if he was initially pursued and seen as a threat because he was black then yes the race issue does need to be addressed.

 

[Anonymous]

The same goes for people who automatically condemn Zimmerman and support Trayvon.

And why wouldn't they support Trayvon and his family? Zimmerman didn't shoot bullet holes into someone's couch...he shot someone's kid. Damn right people are gonna get emotional and pissed with the guy who disobeyed the order to LEAVE...HIM...ALONE.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd still like to know why certain individuals on this board seem to favor the killer.

I'd like to know that too.

 

[Jupiter551]

So it would have been totally unfair to post a a recent picture of a 6'3" male because he was a 17 year old minor? Gimme a break! There's been 57 SCHOOL aged children murdered since school started this year in Chicago. Most of them were by gangs. I'm sure you'd look at a 6'3" black male wearing a hoodie in the dark like a minor too if you were in his shoes.

No response?

Oh! My apologies for the tardiness of my response good sir :violin:

Earlier I read he was 6'2", maybe he kept growing after death.

I have nothing to say regarding school children in chicago, but Tray never had a criminal record, was never (to anyone's knowledge) involved in anything violent at school or outside it, and doesn't deserve to be portrayed as a gangster just because he took facebook pics trying to look cool for the girls. Unlike Zimmerman, he's not here to defend his image or his personality.

Equally, I doubt Zimmerman approached Tray with a big cheesy grin and a freshly pressed suit like he was going to a job interview, like the second of the two pictures of him going around.

In other words, you don't KNOW shit but are happy to go along sheepily without any FACTS.

which FACTS were you referring to? You've stated a number of "FACTS" (always in capitols) in this thread that then just turned out to be opinions. WTF does this have to do with school children in chicago? Here's a FACT - I wouldn't shoot a person of any height or age in the dark for no reason, in fact I wouldn't even be carrying a loaded gun around...

I know this much, Zimmerman was roving around looking for trouble, following people who weren't by any reasonable standard suspicious, with a loaded gun...the fact that it later turned out to be a minor is actually beside the point. People acting like Zimmerman did are a time bomb - sooner or later he would have followed someone, gotten jumpy and shot them. And guess what - he did.

 

[Jupiter551]

New enhanced image, click to enlarge.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin ... d=16055412

I find it amazing that he claimed his head was slammed repeatedly into the concrete and yet the second ambulance (the one for zimmerman) was cancelled because his injuries were trivial. Usually if injuries like that had occurred there would be immediate medical care, danger of concussion, possible fractured skull, etc.

Btw, the mark on his head (that looks like a cartoon giraffe's head to me) mostly appears to not be in the part of his head that would hit the concrete if he was on his back? Most of it appears too high, on the top of his head, not the area that projects most at the back.

He's also completely steady on his feet, his "grievous wounds" haven't even been treated and his nose doesnt appear to be broken at all.

Lol and 5 weeks after the shooting police still haven't talked to Trayvon's girlfriend who heard basically the whole thing over the phone?

 

[Bocefish]

This is what we know so far:





The media has blown this up as a racial thing from the start with nothing to back up their claims and the vast majority of people have fallen for it from the very beginning. NBC just apologized for editing the audio they played to make Zimmerman sound racist.

I have yet to see one media report that was 100% accurate given what we know to be true thus far. A lot of speculation, opinions and downright falsehoods trying to be stated as facts.

All the speculation and opinions in the world doesn't change the fact he's claiming self-defense.

It's the burden of all the investigators and special prosecutors involved to prove otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt, period.

The court of public opinion has nothing to do with the law or facts.

 

[Harvrath]

New enhanced image, click to enlarge.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin ... d=16055412

I find it amazing that he claimed his head was slammed repeatedly into the concrete and yet the second ambulance (the one for zimmerman) was cancelled because his injuries were trivial. Usually if injuries like that had occurred there would be immediate medical care, danger of concussion, possible fractured skull, etc.

Btw, the mark on his head (that looks like a cartoon giraffe's head to me) mostly appears to not be in the part of his head that would hit the concrete if he was on his back? Most of it appears too high, on the top of his head, not the area that projects most at the back.

He's also completely steady on his feet, his "grievous wounds" haven't even been treated and his nose doesnt appear to be broken at all.

Lol and 5 weeks after the shooting police still haven't talked to Trayvon's girlfriend who heard basically the whole thing over the phone?

The ambulance was canceled because Zimmerman was responsive, lucid, able to orient himself, was aware of his surroundings and signed a paper declining transportation by ambulance. Coincidentally, boxers who get knocked out in the ring are able to walk out of the ring under their own power immediately or several minutes after being woken up. Many professional sports athletes are able to walk off the field after having major concussions, such injuries aren't severe? It does not mean Zimmerman wasn't severely injured or that he wasn't in 'A Reasonable Fear for His Life'.

And Zimmerman's injuries, the severity of his injuries or lack thereof isn't even an issue with whether or not his use of lethal force is justified. Even the old Duty to Retreat standard doesn't state you must sustain injuries of a certain severity let alone injuries at all to be justified in taking a life. The mere presence of 'A Reasonable Fear' is sufficient. Not even California is insane enough to require physical victimization before lethal force, at least yet.

 

[Paulie Walnuts]

This issue just reached it's media half life.
Another few weeks of scant mention and passing comment and we'll have forgotten all about it.

America has severe ADD.

If zimerman can remain in the shadows long enough, he'll be safe no matter what he did.... because we just dont have that long of an attention span and

Oh look... Santorum said something stupid... :lol:

Now what were we talking about?

 

[Nordling]

"...even California..."

No bias there, nope. [sarcasm]

 

[Nordling]

This is what we know so far:





The media has blown this up as a racial thing from the start with nothing to back up their claims and the vast majority of people have fallen for it from the very beginning. NBC just apologized for editing the audio they played to make Zimmerman sound racist.

I have yet to see one media report that was 100% accurate given what we know to be true thus far. A lot of speculation, opinions and downright falsehoods trying to be stated as facts.

All the speculation and opinions in the world doesn't change the fact he's claiming self-defense.

It's the burden of all the investigators and special prosecutors involved to prove otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt, period.

The court of public opinion has nothing to do with the law or facts.

Yes, he's pleading self-defense. We've known this since the story first broke. But all it's evidence of is that he pleaded self-defense. If he'd pleaded aliens from Neptune had done it, it'd have been equal as far as the reality of what happened that night...which is still, in part, UNKNOWN. We have witnesses that support both sides; now it's time to untangle it all and try to piece together what really happened.

 

[Jupiter551]

This is what we know so far:





The media has blown this up as a racial thing from the start with nothing to back up their claims and the vast majority of people have fallen for it from the very beginning. NBC just apologized for editing the audio they played to make Zimmerman sound racist.

I have yet to see one media report that was 100% accurate given what we know to be true thus far. A lot of speculation, opinions and downright falsehoods trying to be stated as facts.

All the speculation and opinions in the world doesn't change the fact he's claiming self-defense.

It's the burden of all the investigators and special prosecutors involved to prove otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt, period.

The court of public opinion has nothing to do with the law or facts.

Well, as you're aware those reports contain nothing of substance other than that Zimmerman had minor injuries, Trayvon was face down, and there was the claim of self-defense.

BTW I never heard the NBC tapes, I listened to the unedited calls, and I do believe he was singled out because he was black but not that Zimmerman was going out of his way to be racist. I think Trayvon fit a stereotype in Zimmerman's (and much of the public's) mind, not that Zimmerman hated all black people.

He can be arrested if the arresting officer doesn't buy his claim of self-defense, which according to reports he didn't, except the state attorney overruled him. It almost seems like you're making out that it's a big deal to arrest someone, or that they're immune to arrest if they say it was self-defense, the reality is there is also an inherent burden of proof required to substantiate a self-defense claim. He should have been arrested and questioned while the crime scene was analysed - whether or not he was later ultimately charged or released, rather than being released the same night without a formal interview and given time to work on his story.

You're right that public opinion doesn't change his legal situation, but public opinion CAN sometimes change the law. Occasionally it takes an extreme situation like this one, to highlight how easily someone can kill another person and get away with it, to bring down the wrath of public opinion on what would seem at face value to be a reasonable law.

Using the SYG law someone could quite easily set up a perfectly legal homocide in cold blood simply by luring another person, and acting out a little pantomime of being afraid for their lives and taking one step back, then shooting them, then being creative with the truth to investigators. I'm sure it happens all the time.

 

[luvsyou]

I've waded through this morass of posts. What I find disturbing is everyone's a sideline judge, jury and executioner. I'm sure there are pictures out there that make me look good/bad depending on the moment taken. Is that justification to decide guilt or innocense?

I am deeply disturbed with the justice system that this appears not to be investigated well, or if it was the documentation isn't public.

It's also sad that if the races were different, this thread probably wouldn't happen.

Hopefully, people will learn from this situation and everyone (hispanic, black, and white) will be a little less racist. There seems to be plenty to go around.

Peace.

 

[Bocefish]

By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the FACTS and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the police officer MUST swear and affirm they are making the arrest in good faith and WITH PROBABLE CAUSE.

He was cuffed and brought to the station for further questioning. If you think they had probable cause to arrest him, what was it?

 

[Nordling]

By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the FACTS and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the police officer MUST swear and affirm they are making the arrest in good faith and WITH PROBABLE CAUSE.

He was cuffed and brought to the station for further questioning. If you think they had probable cause to arrest him, what was it?

Because the arresting officer believed he did? And his belief was nullified by a states attorney who got up IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT to drive 50 miles for THIS particular case. That in itself should fill you with suspicion.

 

[Bocefish]

By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the FACTS and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the police officer MUST swear and affirm they are making the arrest in good faith and WITH PROBABLE CAUSE.

He was cuffed and brought to the station for further questioning. If you think they had probable cause to arrest him, what was it?

Because the arresting officer believed he did? And his belief was nullified by a states attorney who got up IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT to drive 50 miles for THIS particular case. That in itself should fill you with suspicion.

He could believe in ghosts or aliens too, that doesn't change the facts and circumstances at the time. The investigation is far from over and he could still very well be arrested and charged. If they arrested him that night, they could only hold him for 48 hours anyway. Zimmerman isn't going anywhere. The SA has a wee bit more experience trying cases than the officer that had suspicions.

 

[Nordling]

By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the FACTS and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the police officer MUST swear and affirm they are making the arrest in good faith and WITH PROBABLE CAUSE.

He was cuffed and brought to the station for further questioning. If you think they had probable cause to arrest him, what was it?

Because the arresting officer believed he did? And his belief was nullified by a states attorney who got up IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT to drive 50 miles for THIS particular case. That in itself should fill you with suspicion.

He could believe in ghosts or aliens too, that doesn't change the facts and circumstances at the time. The investigation is far from over and he could still very well be arrested and charged. If they arrested him that night, they could only hold him for 48 hours anyway. Zimmerman isn't going anywhere. The SA has a wee bit more experience trying cases than the officer that had suspicions.

Eh? 48 hours? Even if he were charged? Where are you getting this? You ignored my whole point. There are dozens of murder cases every day...why did the states attorney suddenly decide to give THIS one special attention? Could it be because a certain ex-Virginia magistrate made a phone call?

 

[Bocefish]

Just more speculation.

 

[Nordling]

Just more speculation.

Speculation on a possible reason for suspicious happenings, yes. NOT speculation of the happenings. The States Attorney DID INDEED drive a fair distance in the middle of the night to stop the arrest of whom, prior to this, was a NOBODY. If this occurred for every murder case, we'd have some very sick state attorneys...lack of sleep, overwork, etc.

 

[Bocefish]

Just more speculation.

Speculation on a possible reason for suspicious happenings, yes. NOT speculation of the happenings. The States Attorney DID INDEED drive a fair distance in the middle of the night to stop the arrest of whom, prior to this, was a NOBODY. If this occurred for every murder case, we'd have some very sick state attorneys...lack of sleep, overwork, etc.

And by executive order, State Attorney Angela Corey has accepted the assignment to handle the case to avoid further speculation. That doesn't change the facts they did not have probable cause to charge him at the time, suspicion is not probable cause.

 

[Nordling]

Just more speculation.

Speculation on a possible reason for suspicious happenings, yes. NOT speculation of the happenings. The States Attorney DID INDEED drive a fair distance in the middle of the night to stop the arrest of whom, prior to this, was a NOBODY. If this occurred for every murder case, we'd have some very sick state attorneys...lack of sleep, overwork, etc.

And by executive order, State Attorney Angela Corey has accepted the assignment to handle the case to avoid further speculation. That doesn't change the facts they did not have probable cause to charge him at the time, suspicion is not probable cause.

Gee, I'm sorry, I had no idea that you interviewed the arresting officer and know all about his reasoning. Do you believe everything you hear? Yes, the REMOVED attorney did SAY they did not have probable cause, but apparently there's now reason to believe he was possibly WRONG, thus he was removed and replaced on this case.

 

[Bocefish]

Just more speculation.

Speculation on a possible reason for suspicious happenings, yes. NOT speculation of the happenings. The States Attorney DID INDEED drive a fair distance in the middle of the night to stop the arrest of whom, prior to this, was a NOBODY. If this occurred for every murder case, we'd have some very sick state attorneys...lack of sleep, overwork, etc.

And by executive order, State Attorney Angela Corey has accepted the assignment to handle the case to avoid further speculation. That doesn't change the facts they did not have probable cause to charge him at the time, suspicion is not probable cause.

Gee, I'm sorry, I had no idea that you interviewed the arresting officer and know all about his reasoning. Do you believe everything you hear? Yes, the REMOVED attorney did SAY they did not have probable cause, but apparently there's now reason to believe he was possibly WRONG, thus he was removed and replaced on this case.

Being possibly wrong does not = probable cause. If you think they had probable cause, what was it? I heard one officer wanted to file negligent manslaughter charges. They can still charge him with that or much worse depending what the investigation reveals.

 

[Nordling]

Just more speculation.

Speculation on a possible reason for suspicious happenings, yes. NOT speculation of the happenings. The States Attorney DID INDEED drive a fair distance in the middle of the night to stop the arrest of whom, prior to this, was a NOBODY. If this occurred for every murder case, we'd have some very sick state attorneys...lack of sleep, overwork, etc.

And by executive order, State Attorney Angela Corey has accepted the assignment to handle the case to avoid further speculation. That doesn't change the facts they did not have probable cause to charge him at the time, suspicion is not probable cause.

Gee, I'm sorry, I had no idea that you interviewed the arresting officer and know all about his reasoning. Do you believe everything you hear? Yes, the REMOVED attorney did SAY they did not have probable cause, but apparently there's now reason to believe he was possibly WRONG, thus he was removed and replaced on this case.

Being possibly wrong does not = probable cause. If you think they had probable cause, what was it? I heard one officer wanted to file negligent manslaughter charges. They can still charge him with that or much worse depending what the investigation reveals.

Huh? Didn't say it did. You're still ignoring the question. WHY DID A STATE ATTORNEY GET UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND DRIVE 50 MILES TO STOP A NOBODY FROM BEING ARRESTED?!

I also never said the arresting officer was taking a shot in the dark. He felt he had cause to arrest; someone who was NOT there during the arrest vetoed his decision. This happens...but rarely in the middle of the night.

 

[Jupiter551]

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1618

probable cause
n. sufficient reason based upon known facts to believe a crime has been committed or that certain property is connected with a crime. Probable cause must exist for a law enforcement officer to make an arrest without a warrant, search without a warrant, or seize property in the belief the items were evidence of a crime. While some cases are easy (pistols and illicit drugs in plain sight, gunshots, a suspect running from a liquor store with a clerk screaming "help"), actions "typical" of drug dealers, burglars, prostitutes, thieves, or people with guilt "written across their faces," are more difficult to categorize. "Probable cause" is often subjective, but if the police officer's belief or even hunch was correct, finding stolen goods, the hidden weapon or drugs may be claimed as self-fulfilling proof of probable cause. Technically, probable cause has to exist prior to arrest, search or seizure.

A dead kid, and a dude with a gun, and several witnesses having heard an altercation followed by a gunshot certainly equals probable cause.

One look at the guy's injuries would be enough for most reasonable people to conclude they weren't as serious as he made out when he claimed the victim was beating him to death.

 

[Bocefish]

You're still ignoring the question. WHY DID A STATE ATTORNEY GET UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND DRIVE 50 MILES TO STOP A NOBODY FROM BEING ARRESTED?!

I also never said the arresting officer was taking a shot in the dark. He felt he had cause to arrest; someone who was NOT there during the arrest vetoed his decision. This happens...but rarely in the middle of the night.

I dunno why he did or even if he did. Ask Him.

Feeling you have cause to arrest and going by the facts and circumstances at the time are 2 different things. That's why law enforcement officers rely on actual lawyers sometimes.

 

[Nordling]

You're still ignoring the question. WHY DID A STATE ATTORNEY GET UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND DRIVE 50 MILES TO STOP A NOBODY FROM BEING ARRESTED?!

I also never said the arresting officer was taking a shot in the dark. He felt he had cause to arrest; someone who was NOT there during the arrest vetoed his decision. This happens...but rarely in the middle of the night.

I dunno why he did or even if he did. Ask Him.

Feeling you have cause to arrest and going by the facts and circumstances at the time are 2 different things. That's why law enforcement officers rely on actual lawyers sometimes.

It wasn't a case of "relying on a lawyer;" it was a case of a state attorney OVERRULING the decision of a peace officer.

Why do you think the officer was going on "feelings" alone? How do you know the facts he went on were not sufficient? A "watcher" was told to not follow a "suspicious character" (the watcher's assumption), he was told that the police department would rather that watchers NOT carry guns. The watcher ignored all that and other things and we have a dead child--a child who had NO record with the law, who we know was returning from a convenience store with iced tea and candy... and on his way back to the home of his father's fiance, he was shot and killed. Many other details that Zimmerman's fans seem to ignore.

 

[Jupiter551]

While the story behind Trayvon Martin's shooting death continues to grab headlines, interest in the case is sharply divided along partisan and racial lines, according to a new study by Pew Research Center.
Far more Republicans (56%) than Democrats (25%) say there has been too much coverage of Martin's death, according to Pew, which surveyed a "nationally representative sample of 1,000 adults" last Thursday through Sunday about top new stories.
In addition, 43% of whites said the story has garnered too much coverage, compared with just 16% of blacks, Pew said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/04/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?iref=allsearch