No, following him definitely didn’t start the confrontation. Depending on exactly what was said, the confrontation could have been started verbally, but that’s unlikely - it would most likely be whoever used physical force first who did that. As you rightly say, there’s no proof of who did that.
So, there’s no proof that Zimmerman was not entitled to use lethal force in his own defence.
Not to me, and I suspect not to anyone capable of rational thought. Suspicion is not equal to hate.
Aye laddie, I dinna think so either.
Mere suspicion is different than using hateful terminology to refer to someone and declaring that they’re up to no good for groundless reasons.
If he certainly said “coon”, there may be grounds for claiming hate. As it’s only audible on an edited tape, and even then not directed at anybody, I’m dubious.
Also, he had reasonable grounds for suspecting Martin.
It isn’t really Florida laws. Based on many years of reading Florida newspapers, it was very hard to get a conviction from a Florida jury with any semi-plausible self-defense claim. The SYG laws just seems to streamline the process and provide civil immunity. If the victim was a burglar, then it didn’t even need to be plausible.
From what I’ve read about other states, a lot of them aren’t that different.
Was Martin in the neighborhood for illegitimate purposes? No.
Was it wrong for him to be walking on the street? No.
Was he trespassing on anyone’s property? No.
Was he committing any crime or harrassing anyone or making a nuisance of himself? No.
Was he intoxicated? No evidence of that whatsoever.
So Zimmerman suspicion’s of Martin “being up to no good” were groundless. This is inarguable.
What grounds? Walking while black? Wearing a hoodie?
Yeah, those grounds. What, that’s not enough for ya?
As mentioned previously, if the prosecution wants to maintain that Zimmerman was suspicious because Martin was black, they are going to have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Garbled audiotape and unsubstantiated accusations work better on the Internet than in a court of law, fortunately.
Regards,
Shodan
Walking slowly through the neighbourhood, in the rain, looking at various houses. In an area where there have been several recent burglaries, that is certainly grounds to call the police, and to ask the guy what he’s doing.
Just as Martin would have been entitled to call the police to report Zimmerman following him, and probably should have done.
Just because some people will consider anyone “walking while black” suspicious without reason doesn’t automatically mean that anyone considering a black person to be suspicious is racist.
I think that the only part where race plays a role is Zimmerman’s initial suspicion, and it’s a big part obviously. Would he have called the cops if it had been a white kid?
I also wonder at Zimmerman’s basic intelligence if he confused talking on a magically invisible phone with being on drugs.
Martin was a non-resident of a gated community. The whole point of having a gate is for non-residents to keep out. There are a lot of black residents of Twin Lakes, but Zimmerman should know most of them by sight and more importantly they would know Zimmerman by sight and would not be inclined to run if they saw him. Martin was visiting a resident, but Zimmerman didn’t know that. Your whole argument is based on knowledge that Zimmerman could not be expected to know. Based on what Zimmerman knew, Martin was a trespasser. That turned out to be wrong, but if can’t discourage trespassers, then why bother to watch?
When they actually met, If Zimmerman had answered Martin’s question, “Why are you following me?”, with “I think you are a burglar and I’m trying to keep an eye on you until the police get here.”, probably would not have helped. If Martin answered Zimmerman’s question, “What are you doing here.” with, “My father is visiting Brandy Green at xxxx Retreat View Circle.” would have defused the situation.
BTW, should you actually use the word inarguable on the Straight Dope? 
They have to prove the criminal charge beyond a reasonable doubt. They don’t have to prove every single thing that the jury hears or can conclude beyond a reasonable doubt.
He called the cops on previous occasions on whites.
Orlando Sentinel April 23rd
That would be great for us if the media motion does pass. For justice, not so much.
White teenagers walking in thr rain talking on the phone or whites doing something that indicates possible criminal activity?
I recall one of his “reports” to the cops concerned two black guys…standing near the gate talking! OMG!
[quote=“JoelUpchurch, post:692, topic:619125”]
Martin was a non-resident of a gated community. The whole point of having a gate is for non-residents to keep out. There are a lot of black residents of Twin Lakes, but Zimmerman should know most of them by sight and more importantly they would know Zimmerman by sight and would not be inclined to run if they saw him. Martin was visiting a resident, but Zimmerman didn’t know that. Your whole argument is based on knowledge that Zimmerman could not be expected to know. Based on what Zimmerman knew, Martin was a trespasser. That turned out to be wrong, but if can’t discourage trespassers, then why bother to watch?
QUOTE]
Why should he know them by sight? Why should they be expected to know him by sight? Does the responsibility to know and be known only apply to blacks? Would Zimmerman be expected to know the white residents? Would they be expected to know him?
Regardless of if race led Zimmerman to be suspicious, there’s evidence in that 911 call that Zimmerman made a negative snap judgement about Martin.
Even if we take Zimmerman at face value and accept that Martin was looking at houses, it is not illegal to look at houses. It’s not illegal to dawdle in the rain either. If Zimmerman had claimed that Martin was going up to people’s windows and peering into them, at least you could call that trespassing and/or an invasion of privacy or something. But Martin was well within his rights to do what he was doing.
Since he made an erroneous snap judgement when he concluded Martin was “up to no good”, why should any us be confident he suddenly became a bastion of accurate reasonableness when it came to concluding he was at risk of serious injury from Martin?
He very well might have thought he was danger, but did he have good reason to think he was in danger? I’m not inclined to put faith in his judgement, when he rashly and inaccurately concluded Martin was “up to no good” to begin with.
He made no “erroneous snap judgement”. He saw someone acting suspiciously and, as he should have done, called 911. There’s no way you can spin that as a bad thing.
It is irrelevant if he was mistaken about Martin’s intentions, just as it’s irrelevant if he was mistaken about the threat Martin posed during the fight. What matters is if his beliefs were reasonable. Based on the evidence at hand, one cannot conclude that they were not.
Yes he should, but we are talking about Trayvon Martin. If he only knew the white residents by sight, That wouldn’t have helped and probably gotten him told to stop watching if he was constantly calling about actual residents walking at night.
From what I’ve read the other residents did know him and many of them considered him a huge PITA. I doubt that has changed since Crumb is talking about suing the subdivision.