Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:40 PM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You're avoiding the questions. I can understand why though. If I made arguments as convoluted as yours, I'd probably try to pivot away from them with phrases like "What matters is ..." too.
Your question was:

Quote:
Who else, besides you, thinks Zimmerman had his gun in his hand when Martin and Zimmerman had their brief conversation before Martin started the fight? AFAICT, you're the only one.
Zimmerman doesn't need the gun in his hand to threaten Martin sufficiently that Martin's attack on Zimmerman could be construed as self defense. For example, if he was wearing his gun in a shoulder holster, and that holster was beneath his jacket, and he threateningly moved back his jacket, revealing the gun, when he asked Trayvon what he was doing there, then that would be a threat.

Quote:
I have no clear evidence on his motive. It could have been any one or a combination of a great many things. Speculating without evidence would invite charges from iiandyiiii that I'm "slandering" Martin.
Oh, please. The longer you make this argument, the more convinced I am that you don't need Trayvon to have a motive. His skin color is enough.
  #102  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:42 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
Zimmerman's behavior before and after the killing. For example, how proud he is of the weapon he used to kill Trayvon.
You must have misunderstood - I was asking for evidence that established what you claimed.
Quote:
You still haven't explained why you believe Trayvon would attack Zimmerman if he didn't feel threatened by him.
Again, you misunderstood. That Trayvon attacked Zimmerman is evidence that he did not feel threatened by Zimmerman.
Quote:
So, let me describe a scenario. Monica is in line for the restroom at a bar. A man approaches her, looks her up and down, licks his lips, and then says, "You've got a real purty mouth...". She maces him. Still as ridiculous?
Yes still ridiculous, and not what a reasonable person would do.

Regards,
Shodan
  #103  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:48 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
... Isn't it more reasonable (especially considering what we know about Zimmerman) that he asked this in exactly the threatening sort of way I'd described, leading Trayvon to try and defend himself? ...
No, it isn't "more reasonable". Dee Dee heard the exchange with Zimmerman on the phone and didn't mention anything about the threatening way the question was asked in her testimony. I see a couple of obvious possible reasons for this:

1) it didn't actually happen like that.

or

2) the prosecutor, during his questioning of Dee Dee, neglected to highlight that Zimmerman threatened Martin first, thus justifying his assault on Zimmerman.

I leave it as an exercise to our readers to determine which of those (or whatever additional possible reasons they can think of) is most likely.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 12-05-2018 at 04:51 PM.
  #104  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:03 PM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Wow. I just... wow.
  #105  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:05 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
Wow. I just... wow.
You're not going to convince many people with arguments of this caliber.
  #106  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:11 PM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You're not going to convince many people with arguments of this caliber.
Yeah, I've realized that I'm not gonna convince you at all, so why bother trying? You determined that George Zimmerman was a fine, upstanding gentleman, and that Trayvon Martin had it coming, a very long time ago.

Maybe we can continue this discussion in a Pit thread, but to be honest, I don't know if I can muster up the energy for that. So fine. Keep believing that Trayvon Martin was a violent, deranged man, despite showing no sign of that personality at any time prior. Keep believing that George Zimmerman did the right thing by putting him down, and that he's made Florida a safer place by killing such a dangerous criminal. And keep telling yourself it's not because he's black, if it makes you feel better.
  #107  
Old 12-05-2018, 05:32 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 27,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
The officer had no idea that the criminal was dead already.
He didn't know anything, was my point. He didn't know who he was after, who else was in there, if the perp was armed, what the perp was wearing, how many other kids there might have been, or if there was a robot in the closet. He didn't know anything. Why was he charging into the house? Poor policing. Bad decisions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
He went into a house, which was filled with debris due to the entry of a criminal just before. He had to go in right away -- or should he have stayed outside and tried to ascertain information?
He had to... he had no choice in the matter? Who told him to do this? YES: IMO the officer should have tried to determine what was going on before he charged into an unfamiliar close quarters area to face unknown assailants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
What if the grandpa didn't wake up because of his deafness, and the intruder was in the process of killing the kid, and the police had stayed outside to try and determine what was happening (do you have an actual suggestion of how they would go about this?) for an extra five minutes, during which the kid had his throat slit?
None of that happened. Please try and stick with actual events, not hypothetical events. Bringing them up adds nothing to the discussion unless you are prepared to present evidence of having been in the officer's head doing the shooting or you have Rick's portal gun, and I doubt either of those is the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
You've admitted that you haven't watched the video, and aren't going to. And yet, you make these blanket statements that are easily contradicted by the footage.z
Nothing I've written has recieved a response from you or anyone else showing that what I wrote was contradicted by the video, and, in fact, I've accepted your summation of the video without reservation thus far. Trying to bring up that I don't want to watch a human being be needlessly slaughtered is hardly a good debate tactic, and has no bearing on the things I'm saying. The cop did a shitty, reckless thing because he was spectacularly bad at his job. A law-abiding citizen is dead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
I am not one to justify police shootings. But in this case? I don't see what the else the cop could have done.
The second sentence falsifies the first.
  #108  
Old 12-05-2018, 06:06 PM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
He didn't know anything, was my point. He didn't know who he was after, who else was in there, if the perp was armed, what the perp was wearing, how many other kids there might have been, or if there was a robot in the closet. He didn't know anything. Why was he charging into the house? Poor policing. Bad decisions.He had to... he had no choice in the matter? Who told him to do this? YES: IMO the officer should have tried to determine what was going on before he charged into an unfamiliar close quarters area to face unknown assailants.
What the heck are you talking about? Do you think this cop saw a random house, ran inside, and shot the first person he saw?

.... OK, that did actually happen, but that was a different case, not this one. In this case, the cops entered the house for two reasons: 1) the victim's wife called 911 when the assailant broke into their home. 2) when police arrived at the house, they heard a series of gunshots, then silence. At this point, then ran towards the house to provide assistance, when 3) they encountered an armed man. They warned him to drop his weapon. He did not do so and instead flicked his flashlight to point at the policeman in front, who then shot him.

So to answer your questions -- he knew he was after an assailant who had broken into this home, because the victim's wife told him so when she called 911 (or more accurately, she told Dispatch, and Dispatch told him). He rushed in because he heard gunshots, and wanted to prevent the intruder from killing the people who live in the house, or apprehend him if he had already done so. No, he didn't have perfect information, but in the real world, you never do
Quote:
None of that happened. Please try and stick with actual events, not hypothetical events. Bringing them up adds nothing to the discussion unless you are prepared to present evidence of having been in the officer's head doing the shooting or you have Rick's portal gun, and I doubt either of those is the case.
My point with the hypothetical is not to claim it actually happened or to explain what was happening in the officer's head, but to suggest that a policy of "sit outside and gather information until you know exactly what has happened" isn't in the public interest, since in any number of scenarios it could lead to greater harm as the cops sit around and gather information while criminals are committing crimes.

Also -- on review of both the footage and some of the articles -- the cops were actually outside the house, approaching the front door, when the shooting occurred. They were walking down a path that leads to a porch (which I mistakenly thought was a room). The "cabinet" I thought was blocking the door is actually the door itself -- it has been knocked down, but something is propping it up at an angle, making it look like the door has more volume -- hence why I thought it was a cabinet rather than a door.

Quote:
Nothing I've written has recieved a response from you or anyone else showing that what I wrote was contradicted by the video, and, in fact, I've accepted your summation of the video without reservation thus far. Trying to bring up that I don't want to watch a human being be needlessly slaughtered is hardly a good debate tactic, and has no bearing on the things I'm saying. The cop did a shitty, reckless thing because he was spectacularly bad at his job. A law-abiding citizen is dead.
The second video on the link below doesn't show anyone being "needlessly slaughtered". It pauses just before the officer fires his gun. If you watch the second video on the page, from 33 seconds in to 48 seconds in, you'll see exactly what I'm talking about without seeing anything graphic. However, I do understand that this might be disturbing, so I pulled the video up on my computer screen instead of my phone and will provide as full and detailed a description as I can:

30-36 seconds: the officers are approaching the house down a path that leads to a porch. The front door has a metal security door, which is wide open. The wooden door is completely off its hinges and leaning forward with the bottom still in the doorway. There's a lamp that's fallen across the leaning door, making the entrance somewhat blocked.

37 seconds: through the door, we can see a small room, on the other side of which is another door. At this time, we see an old man in a bathrobe carrying a flashlight and a gun walk across the field of view presented by the doorway, from the room that the front door leads to and through the door on the far side. He ducks behind the far wall, then peaks back. There is a light on inside the house, but outside it is dark, aside from the officers' flashlights. Cops begin shouting for him to drop the gun.

37-45 seconds: the old man is behind the far doorway. He doesn't have his gun up, but is keeps leaning back from behind the wall to look at the cops. They are repeatedly shouting for him to "drop the gun!" or "lower your weapon!". Obviously, he doesn't respond.

46 seconds: until now, the guy was leaning with his back against the wall, and was turning to peak behind it. Now he steps fully into that far doorway, facing the officers head-on. The gun is in his right hand which is at waist level directly in front of him, facing down. However, he raises his flashlight in his right hand and points it directly at the officer.

The video now pauses and zooms in on the victim. The newscaster points out that he appears to have a gun in one hand and a flashlight in the other.

56 seconds: the video skips back a bit, then continues from where it paused here. We hear the officer say: "Robe's got a gun!" referring to the victim, who is wearing a robe. As he points the flashlight at the officers, the video pauses, but we can hear the audio of four gunshots.

Quote:
The second sentence falsifies the first.
Either no police shooting is every justified and police officers shouldn't even carry guns, or there are cases where the police should be allowed to use deadly force. This is definitely not a case where deadly force should have been used, but from the bodycam footage, I don't see any reasonable way that the cops could have made that determination at the time.
  #109  
Old 12-05-2018, 08:50 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You're avoiding the questions.
Moi?

Quote:
I have no clear evidence on his motive.
Nobody's asking for evidence. Just your theory. Which has got to be a good one, since any others are "bizarre". So where is it?
  #110  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:41 PM
clairobscur is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 17,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasmine View Post
The only thing "tragic" about this other situation is that it is a tragedy that anyone could be that stupid. Holding a gun and failing to follow police instructions is tantamount to "suicide by cop". I really can't envision how one could NOT be shot under those circumstances.
By having a police force that is properly trained and *doesn't* open fire simply because there's a risk. The behavior of LEOs in the USA is simply appalling. And the level to which your public opinion is willing to give them a pass incredible. Even on this board extremely critical of the way these issues are handled, even among the most vocal "black live matters" activists, how willing you are to find excuses for murderous LEOs on the flimsiest basis leaves me speechless.

Yes, yes, I know, criminals have much more guns in the USA, whatever...It still *doesn't* even remotely justify how often your police forces kill people, and what reasons are considered good enough, not just by the perpetrator, not simply by the general public, but even on this leftist board.

To take this example : someone said that the victim was mostly deaf. But even if he wasn't, there are a lot of people who are. What are the procedures in place to make sure that *nobody*, *ever* is killed simply because he didn't hear a command? What are the procedures in place to make sure that someone who is a stubborn idiot who refuses to obey a command won't be killed simply for being a stubborn idiot? This should simply never happen. OK, it could. Shit happens. A young, particularly badly trained officer panics. A freak situation goes out of hand. Once in a blue moon someone dies who shouldn't have. That's how things should be. Anything less is simply inacceptable.

It's not a matter of number of weapons in the hands of criminals. At this level, it's obviously a matter of culture. LEOs kill people because pretty much everybody find normal that they'll open fire for pretty much any reason (look at all the advice about how one must be super-extra-cautious in presence of a police officer if one
doesn't want to get killed. This is pretty insane. One should feel extremely safe in presence of a police officer.) They kill people because they aren't trained to make not killing people their highest priority, because nobody seemingly *demands* it. They and the public find normal that avoiding even a relatively low level of risk for the officers is more important than making sure that all the citizens they interact with are still alive at the end of the interaction. It takes an incredible level of recklessness on the part of the officer (like jumping out of a car and shooting dead a teenager on camera) for their action to be even questioned, and even then plenty of people find them excuses and they aren't sentenced.
__________________
S'en vai la memoria, e tornara pu.
  #111  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:11 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Moi? ...
Yes, you. I've asked you the following questions, which you do not appear to have answered:

Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
I could see why you would try to make a (bad, inaccurate, wrong) case for "stalking", but at which point in the timeline did Zimmerman either "threaten" Martin or "brandish" his weapon? Or is that just a figment of your imagination?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Your alternate theory is what? That Zimmerman had a gun pointed at Martin the whole time but he still let him beat him up a good bit before deciding to shoot him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Could you explain your theory to me again, because it's a bit bizarre from my perspective? Here's what I've gathered so far: that you think GZ confronted TM, gun drawn, surly, and menacing, and began interrogating him. TM, in fear for his life, attacks GZ. GZ (and this is where your theory gets particularly implausible in my eyes) allows TM to break his nose, knock him down, straddle him, beat his head on the concrete for a bit before deciding, finally, to shoot TM with the gun he has held in his hand this entire time. Is that right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Who else, besides you, thinks Zimmerman had his gun in his hand when Martin and Zimmerman had their brief conversation before Martin started the fight? AFAICT, you're the only one. ...




Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
... Nobody's asking for evidence. Just your theory. Which has got to be a good one, since any others are "bizarre". So where is it?
I never said "any" others were bizarre, just yours. Mind answering some of my questions now?
  #112  
Old 12-06-2018, 01:42 AM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 83,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
What "potential crime" are you talking about here?
What "potential crime" did Zimmerman think Martin was going to commit when he first saw him? What suspicious behavior was Martin exhibiting that justified Zimmerman in following him?

Why is it that you think Martin was acting in a suspicious manner by just walking down a public street but you don't think Zimmerman was acting in a suspicious manner by following Martin to his home?

Last edited by Little Nemo; 12-06-2018 at 01:45 AM.
  #113  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:02 AM
Steophan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
I don't think he knew Zimmerman was armed until Zimmerman demanded to know what Trayvon "was doing" on a public street
At what point did Zimmerman question Martin on a public street? The entire incident where he was shot happened in a private place, that Martin was not a resident of.

Have you considered learning the facts of the case before talking about it?
  #114  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:03 AM
Steophan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Why is it that you think Martin was acting in a suspicious manner by just walking down a public street but you don't think Zimmerman was acting in a suspicious manner by following Martin to his home?
It wasn't a public street, nor was Martin's home on that street.

Again, have you considered learning the facts of the case before talking about it?
  #115  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:27 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,829
Didn't Zimmerman himself explain why he found Martin suspicious? Didn't he say it was because some black people had been breaking into places? Doesn't that sound like the only suspicious thing he was doing was being black? His only other actions were wearing his hoodie to shelter from the cold, and talking on his phone. Neither of those is suspicious.

If Zimmerman had just called, maybe you could call it overvigilance. But then he was so sure he was up to no-good that he had to follow him. Following someone in and of itself is a threat. It's why, if you find yourself accidentally following someone, you tend to take a different route to avoid scaring them.

The phone call shows that Martin felt threatened. You don't stop to confront someone following you unless you think they are up to something.
  #116  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:46 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
What "potential crime" did Zimmerman think Martin was going to commit when he first saw him? What suspicious behavior was Martin exhibiting that justified Zimmerman in following him?
Well, here is a transcript of the call Zimmerman made to the authorities. He didn't get very specific, and I certainly wasn't there to witness Martin's behavior, but here's what he said:

Quote:
Hey, we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy, uh, [near] Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about. ...
It sounds like maybe he was concerned that Martin might be looking to break in / steal stuff from the houses in the neighborhood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
... Why is it that you think Martin was acting in a suspicious manner by just walking down a public street but you don't think Zimmerman was acting in a suspicious manner by following Martin to his home?
Zimmerman did not 'follow Martin to his home'. Here, maybe this picture will help you out.
  #117  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:48 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
... Following someone in and of itself is a threat. ...
It is neither a crime nor justification for assault.
  #118  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:49 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Didn't Zimmerman himself explain why he found Martin suspicious? Didn't he say it was because some black people had been breaking into places? ...
No, that's not what he said. Read the transcript I posted a link to.
  #119  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:57 AM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasmine View Post
The only thing "tragic" about this other situation is that it is a tragedy that anyone could be that stupid. Holding a gun and failing to follow police instructions is tantamount to "suicide by cop". I really can't envision how one could NOT be shot under those circumstances. In fact, I think it would qualify for a "Darwin Award".
I don't know the facts of the case but he had just been through an amazingly stressful situation involving gunfire and violence, presumably without ear protection. Who knows if he could even hear police instructions or even think straight?
  #120  
Old 12-06-2018, 05:47 AM
clairobscur is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 17,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
It is neither a crime nor justification for assault.
Nobody knows how the confrontation started and how it went. From his behavior before and since, Zimmerman is obviously a dangerous nutcase. You can't exactly exclude that he decided to make a "citizen arrest" for looking suspicious, or brandished his gun under the nose of his victim. It's quite obvious to me that at the very least he hoped for something dramatic to happen, preferably involving a criminal and his gun.
__________________
S'en vai la memoria, e tornara pu.
  #121  
Old 12-06-2018, 06:19 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by clairobscur View Post
Nobody knows how the confrontation started and how it went. From his behavior before and since, Zimmerman is obviously a dangerous nutcase. You can't exactly exclude that he decided to make a "citizen arrest" for looking suspicious, or brandished his gun under the nose of his victim. It's quite obvious to me that at the very least he hoped for something dramatic to happen, preferably involving a criminal and his gun.
As bolstered by the fact that Zimmerman was specifically told not to go after Martin yet went out anyway, with a gun, to follow him.

Under the same circumstances, had the police come along and shot Zimmerman instead the Usual Suspects would undoubtedly be here explaining why it was all the victim's fault for not obeying the police and for being a threat by following an innocent person while armed.
  #122  
Old 12-06-2018, 06:44 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Yes, you. I've asked you the following questions, which you do not appear to have answered
I have, you just didn't like what they say about you.

Quote:
I never said "any" others were bizarre, just yours. Mind answering some of my questions now?
You've done nothing but dismiss reality while offering none of your own. You could just admit you ain't got any fuckin' way to continue to deny the obvious.
  #123  
Old 12-06-2018, 08:44 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
It also is perfectly reasonable not to go into your home and LET THE STALKER KNOW WHERE YOU ARE LIVING.
According to the evidence, both that of Dee Dee and of Zimmerman's contemporaneous statements, Martin and Zimmerman had lost sight of each other. Thus if Martin had simply walked into his own living room, he would not have reasonably expected that Zimmerman would be able to tell where he lived. Martin had to go looking for Zimmerman. So no, that's not reasonable.
Quote:
Your own post shows the ridiculousness of your theory. You imagine Martin was so triggered by Zimmerman asking "what are you doing around here" that he snapped and attacked? Isn't it more reasonable (especially considering what we know about Zimmerman) that he asked this in exactly the threatening sort of way I'd described, leading Trayvon to try and defend himself?
No, it is not more reasonable.

First, there is no evidence that Zimmerman asked anything in a threatening manner. Dee Dee testified that Zimmerman sounded like an old man when he said the only words she reports him as saying.

Second, asking "what are you doing" is not something against which you need to defend yourself using violence. Even if it is asked by a scary fat white guy, and especially if you don't find the scary fat white guy scary or fat or white enough to simply avoid by walking into your own house.
Quote:
Or is Zimmerman beyond reproach, and we only need to question the motives of 17 year old black men?
By all means, examine the motives of both.

Zimmerman shot Martin because Martin put him in fear of death or serious injury by attacking him, breaking his nose, blackening his eyes, and beating his head against the ground. Martin attacked Zimmerman, broke his nose, blackened his eyes, and beat his head against the ground, because Zimmerman put him in fear of death or serious injury by asking him what he was doing.

One of these is a reasonable motive. The other is not.

Regards,
Shodan
  #124  
Old 12-06-2018, 08:54 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by clairobscur View Post
Nobody knows how the confrontation started and how it went. From his behavior before and since, Zimmerman is obviously a dangerous nutcase. You can't exactly exclude that he decided to make a "citizen arrest" for looking suspicious, or brandished his gun under the nose of his victim. It's quite obvious to me that at the very least he hoped for something dramatic to happen, preferably involving a criminal and his gun.
As has been pointed out several times, if Zimmerman were brandishing his gun under Martin's nose at any point, why did Zimmerman wait for more than a minute while Martin beat him, knocked him down, and sat on his chest smashing his head on the ground?

As far as making a citizen's arrest, why then did Zimmerman instantly contact the police upon spotting Martin? You will remember that Zimmerman was trying to find out a house number or street name, so that he could give a more precise location where he could meet up with the police, who were on their way. It was while Zimmerman was doing that when Martin doubled back from his father's girlfriend's condo, sought him out, and confronted and attacked him.

The person who was trying to take action on his own account, and was looking for something dramatic to happen, was Martin.

Regards,
Shodan
  #125  
Old 12-06-2018, 08:55 AM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
What's your theory behind Martin's motive, Shodan? Why did he go back and track down Zimmerman, then attack him?
  #126  
Old 12-06-2018, 09:13 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
I have, you just didn't like what they say about you.

You've done nothing but dismiss reality while offering none of your own. You could just admit you ain't got any fuckin' way to continue to deny the obvious.
No, you haven't, and now you're trying to use this silly bluster to cover up that fact. It's not working.
  #127  
Old 12-06-2018, 09:15 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
What's your theory behind Martin's motive, Shodan? Why did he go back and track down Zimmerman, then attack him?
We don't know that he did that. At best that's a guess that may fit the evidence, but it's only one guess of many possibilities that are consistent with the evidence.
  #128  
Old 12-06-2018, 09:31 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
What's your theory behind Martin's motive, Shodan? Why did he go back and track down Zimmerman, then attack him?
He was looking for a fight. Martin thought of himself as a bad-ass. Remember the whole "NO LIMIT NIGGA" thing?

He had been kicked out of school for drugs and theft and vandalism, his mother couldn't handle him, so she sent him to his father to see if his father could do any better.

Martin thought he was a tough guy. Maybe he was. Few people, however, are tougher than a bullet.

You fuck with enough people, sooner or later you find you fucked with the wrong people. He was only 17, so this was sooner.

Regards,
Shodan
  #129  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:33 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip View Post
(Also, apologies for the nitpick, but it's "Manson." Helter Skelter, not Humbert Humbert.)
Thanks!
  #130  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:35 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
We don't know that he did that. At best that's a guess that may fit the evidence, but it's only one guess of many possibilities that are consistent with the evidence.
Dee Dee testified that Martin "say he lost the guy" and said he was "right by his father house". You're saying that should be understood to mean something else?
  #131  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:44 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
He was looking for a fight. Martin thought of himself as a bad-ass. Remember the whole "NO LIMIT NIGGA" thing?

He had been kicked out of school for drugs and theft and vandalism, his mother couldn't handle him, so she sent him to his father to see if his father could do any better.

Martin thought he was a tough guy. Maybe he was. Few people, however, are tougher than a bullet.

You fuck with enough people, sooner or later you find you fucked with the wrong people. He was only 17, so this was sooner.

Regards,
Shodan
Cool story, bro.

Meanwhile, Zimmerman was also looking for a fight. He was told by the police to stay inside and not confront Martin, yet he took a weapon and followed Martin. Unlike Martin, Zimmerman had an actual history of violence including assaulting an undercover police officer and a restraining order for domestic violence.

Zimmerman thought he was a tough guy. Maybe he was. Or maybe he was just a violent, insecure and unstable individual looking to hurt someone, and that someone turned out to be a 17-year-old boy.
  #132  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:45 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Dee Dee testified that Martin "say he lost the guy" and said he was "right by his father house". You're saying that should be understood to mean something else?
This could mean many things, even taken with all the other evidence. We don't know what exactly happened, and exactly what choices were made by Martin, and why, and we probably never will.
  #133  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:53 AM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Dee Dee testified that Martin "say he lost the guy" and said he was "right by his father house". You're saying that should be understood to mean something else?
Did you even read those transcripts? Because they paint a picture that's very different than the one you're claiming they do. Trayvon lost the guy, his girlfriend is telling him to run, but he's telling her, "relax, I'm right by my dad's house, I'm safe". That's when he sees that Zimmerman is stalking him again, but he's breathing hard, and doesn't start running again:

Quote:
Dee Dee: He say he ain’t goin’ run, cause he say he right by his father house…

BDLR: OK.

Dee Dee: So, and in a couple minutes…he say the man followin’ him again, behin’ him. And I say, ‘RUN!’ You goin’ to run? He say he not goin’ run cause…I could have known he not going to run, cause he out of breath. and then, he told me, he say this guy getting’ close to him. I told him ‘RUN!’ And then, and then… I tol’ him ‘Keep runnin’.’ He not goin’ run. And then he say…I told him, ‘Why you not runnin’? He say, ‘I’m not go’ run,’ cause he tired, but I know he tired.

BDLR: I’m sorry…Trayvon said he’s not running because…he’s not going to run he said…because you could tell he was tired?

Dee Dee: Yeah.

BDLR: Well, how could you tell he was tired?

Dee Dee: He was breathin’ hard.

BDLR: OK, real hard?

Dee Dee: Real hard.
Clearly, if it took a "couple of minutes" then when he said he was "right by his father's house" he didn't mean "at the front door".

Trayvon Martin didn't track down Zimmerman. Based on your own cite, Zimmerman was initially following Martin when he saw him standing underneath the covered roof of the mail shed. When he realized that a grown man was watching him from his car, he ran to his father's house. He lost Zimmerman and slowed to a walk, because he was winded, once he got to his father's street. That's when Zimmerman approached him again. Trayvon, who is on his own street (and piss off, Shodan, it's a gated community where his father lives, and he is living with his father. It IS his own street, and he has every right to be there) shouldn't be being followed by an asshole with a vigilante hardon.

Quote:
BDLR: OK. Could you…and you may not have been able to…could you hear whether it was raining at that time or not?

Dee Dee: It was not raining, cause I hear him OK.

BDLR: OK, and when you’re telling him “Run, Run, Run”, are you yelling at him, or…

Dee Dee: I was not yelling at him…

BDLR: I don’t mean yelling, I mean, but were you like, were you being emphatic like…

Dee Dee: Shouting…shouting at him, yeah.

BDLR: OK..um…and then what happened?

Dee Dee: And then he told me like the guy was getting close..like..and he told me the guy was getting real close to him. The next I hear, “What are you following me for?”

BDLR: OK, so let me make sure I understand this…so, Trayvon tells you the guy’s getting closer to him…

Dee Dee: Yeah.

BDLR: …and then you hear Trayvon saying something…

Dee Dee: Yeah.

BDLR: And what do you hear Trayvon saying?

Dee Dee: “Why you followin’ me for?”

BDLR: “Why you following me for?”

Dee Dee: Yeah.

BDLR: And then what happened?

Dee Dee: I hear this, ya know, man… it wa’ like a ol’ man…

BDLR: OK.

Dee Dee: …say, ‘Wha’ you doin’ aroun’ here?’
Shodan, HurricaneDitka, I realize this case happened a long time ago, and maybe you've forgotten what actually happened. You both claimed that Dee Dee's testimony shows that Martin doubled back from his dad's house, tracked down Zimmerman, and assaulted him. THIS IS NOT WHAT THE TEXT SHOWS US. So I will now accept your apology for your mistake. I'm sure it wasn't intentional, you just don't remember the details of a 6 year old case very well.
  #134  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:56 AM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
He was looking for a fight. Martin thought of himself as a bad-ass. Remember the whole "NO LIMIT NIGGA" thing?

He had been kicked out of school for drugs and theft and vandalism, his mother couldn't handle him, so she sent him to his father to see if his father could do any better.

Martin thought he was a tough guy. Maybe he was. Few people, however, are tougher than a bullet.

You fuck with enough people, sooner or later you find you fucked with the wrong people. He was only 17, so this was sooner.

Regards,
Shodan
That is the most disgusting thing I've ever read. Yep, claiming to be a "no limit nigga" makes you a danger to society. Thankfully, a hero like Zimmerman was around to stop him.

How about this, one of many, many violent incidents that Zimmerman was involved in:

Quote:
On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police, alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings.[47] The police reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they made their way inside and arrested him.[48] He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.
So pulling a shotgun on your girlfriend is A-OK but being a "no limit nigga" makes you a danger to society. Good to know, Shodan. Good to know.
  #135  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:02 AM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 3,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Dee Dee testified that Martin "say he lost the guy" and said he was "right by his father house". You're saying that should be understood to mean something else?
Her testimony does not prove that he was directly next to his father's house and then he went back to confront Martin. Right by his fathers house could also be where the confrontation occurred. He could have been standing right where Zimmerman encountered him and where the incident occurred and said he was "right by my father's house". We are talking about a couple hundred feet. As I said earlier, My parents yard is 350 feet long, if I was in the back of the yard but was describing to a friend where I was, I would say that I was at my parents house. That does not mean that I'm literally arms reach of the door. If I was walking to my house and was a block down and a friend asked where I was I could easily say right by my house. You are adding a lot of your own meaning to her words that just isn't there.

Also she said he sounded scared. This does not fit with the theory that he was about to actually walk into his dad's house and then decided, for some reason, that he had to go back and start a fight because of his violent tendencies that there is no evidence of.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #136  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:13 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
No, you haven't, and now you're trying to use this silly bluster to cover up that fact. It's not working.
Moi?
  #137  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:14 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Dee Dee testified that Martin "say he lost the guy" and said he was "right by his father house". You're saying that should be understood to mean something else?
Strangely, you left out this part (bolding mine):
Quote:
Dee Dee: He say he ain’t goin’ run, cause he say he right by his father house…

BDLR: OK.

Dee Dee: So, and in a couple minutes…he say the man followin’ him again, behin’ him. And I say, ‘RUN!’ You goin’ to run? He say he not goin’ run cause…I could have known he not going to run, cause he out of breath. and then, he told me, he say this guy getting’ close to him. I told him ‘RUN!’ And then, and then… I tol’ him ‘Keep runnin’.’ He not goin’ run. And then he say…I told him, ‘Why you not runnin’? He say, ‘I’m not go’ run,’ cause he tired, but I know he tired.

BDLR: I’m sorry…Trayvon said he’s not running because…he’s not going to run he said…because you could tell he was tired?

Dee Dee: Yeah.
So after Martin lost Zimmerman, Martin left reports that Zimmerman has found him again. And then...
Quote:
Dee Dee: And then he told me like the guy was getting close..like..and he told me the guy was getting real close to him. The next I hear, “What are you following me for?”

BDLR: OK, so let me make sure I understand this…so, Trayvon tells you the guy’s getting closer to him…
In addition, the transcript mentions that Martin was scared by Zimmerman following him and that Zimmerman was "looking crazy". Dee Dee also reported that Zimmerman sounded angry when Martin asked him why he was following him and that Martin was heard saying "get off" during the apparent struggle.

So this whole "Martin lost him and was right by his father's house, and then went back to find Zimmerman and started a fight" narrative not only isn't supported by the transcript cited but is actively contradicted by it. In addition, the fact that Martin was described as frightened and too tired to run away actively contradicts the characterization of Martin as a "tough guy" who was "looking for a fight". Conversely, Zimmerman is described as angry, intimidating and instigating the conflict.

Funny how that is.
  #138  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:32 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
That is the most disgusting thing I've ever read. ...
This was the most predictable response in this whole thread. No matter what either of us said about possible reasons for Martin attacking Zimmerman, the response was always going to be along these lines: 'disgusting' 'slandering the dead' 'won't somebody think of the children' 'oh my feels'.

Stuff your outrage. Martin started a fight which he lost. He should not have done that.
  #139  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:35 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
He started it except for the being stalked and confronted and threatened part, that is.
  #140  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:44 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
He started it except for the being stalked and confronted and threatened part, that is.
There's no evidence that Martin was "threatened" by Zimmerman. We've been over this already.

And what have you got for the "confronted" part? Martin was the one that started the conversation with Zimmerman, according to Dee Dee. Sounds to me like he was confronting Zimmerman, not the other way around.

As for "stalked", you're apparently not using the legal definition, so rather than me guess at what personal definition you may be using, why don't you just tell me what you mean by "stalked".
  #141  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:50 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
This was the most predictable response in this whole thread. No matter what either of us said about possible reasons for Martin attacking Zimmerman, the response was always going to be along these lines: 'disgusting' 'slandering the dead' 'won't somebody think of the children' 'oh my feels'.

Stuff your outrage
And what of yours, which appears to be designed to deflect from the fact that you left out several extremely salient details in your description of events.

Quote:
Martin started a fight which he lost.
Did he start it? Your transcript suggests that Zimmerman was the main antagonist and while it doesn't show who threw the first punch (and since one of the parties is dead we only have Zimmerman's word for it) we have a report of Martin saying "Get off!".

Quote:
There's no evidence that Martin was "threatened" by Zimmerman. We've been over this already.
Apart from the various times Dee Dee mentioned Martin expressing concern over Zimmerman's actions, that he sounded scared, that Zimmerman had gotten "real close" and that when asked why he was following Martin Zimmerman responded angrily?

Quote:
And what have you got for the "confronted" part? Martin was the one that started the conversation with Zimmerman, according to Dee Dee. Sounds to me like he was confronting Zimmerman, not the other way around.
So asking a person who followed you home why they were following you is now a belligerent act, but actually following someone home isn't?
  #142  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:51 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 11,026

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
... (and piss off, Shodan, ...
Knock it off. This is not appropriate for this forum. If you feel you must, the Pit is right around the corner.

[/moderating]
  #143  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:52 AM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
There's no evidence that Martin was "threatened" by Zimmerman. We've been over this already.

And what have you got for the "confronted" part? Martin was the one that started the conversation with Zimmerman, according to Dee Dee. Sounds to me like he was confronting Zimmerman, not the other way around.

As for "stalked", you're apparently not using the legal definition, so rather than me guess at what personal definition you may be using, why don't you just tell me what you mean by "stalked".
A grown man follows a child around, approaches him, and the child ends up dead. Yet you blame the victim of this encounter. Typical.

And yeah, you're right. Any excuse you would make would be disgusting, because you're defending someone who, morally, is the equivalent of a murderer. Even if Trayvon attacked Zimmerman in cold blood, which you have no evidence for, none of this would have ever happened if George Zimmerman didn't go out looking to make trouble. In your scenario, where Martin suddenly becomes violent despite no history of violence, him and Zimmerman share the blame for what happened, 50/50. Again, before you screech about Florida law, I am talking about moral culpability, not legal responsibility.

In any realistic scenario, Zimmerman's share of the blame explodes upwards. So yeah. You defending him IS disgusting, and always will be.
  #144  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:54 AM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Knock it off. This is not appropriate for this forum. If you feel you must, the Pit is right around the corner.

[/moderating]
Fair enough, I will tone down any personal discussion here. I think we simultaneously posted so if my last post falls afoul of your instructions I apologize and will take it to the Pit.
  #145  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:56 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
... So asking a person who followed you home why they were following you is now a belligerent act, but actually following someone home isn't?
Neither one of those are criminal acts, and neither justifies violence. Punching someone in the face for asking "what are you doing" IS though, and straddling them and bashing their head on concrete does justify a violent self-defense response.
  #146  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:03 PM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Neither one of those are criminal acts, and neither justifies violence. Punching someone in the face for asking "what are you doing" IS though, and straddling them and bashing their head on concrete does justify a violent self-defense response.
So just to summarize. You believe that, entirely unprovoked, Martin attacked Zimmerman, who was able to reach for his gun and end the attack.

This despite the fact that Martin has no history of violence while Zimmerman has plenty of violent incidents, many involving guns.

But you refuse to tell us why Martin would do such a thing because you know that we would find your reasoning disgusting.

Thank you for your time, I think I know everything I wanted to know now.
  #147  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:10 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
... In your scenario, where Martin suddenly becomes violent despite no history of violence, him and Zimmerman share the blame for what happened, 50/50. Again, before you screech about Florida law, I am talking about moral culpability, not legal responsibility. ....
No. Morally, the one who initiates violence is at fault. The evidence suggests that was likely Martin.
  #148  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:12 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
My calendar does not show this to be Opposite Day.
  #149  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:12 PM
Babale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
No. Morally, the one who initiates violence is at fault. The evidence suggests that was likely Martin.
Are you going to address the history of violent behavior that makes that unlikely?

Nah, of course you're not.
  #150  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:14 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
A grown man follows a child around...
Martin was 17. He may not have legally been an adult, but he's not what I would call a child (unless I was trying to make an emotional appeal because the facts didn't support my argument).
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017