Yes. That’s clearly what he was suggesting.
But again, what he said doesn’t make him a liar. Martin’s hand could absolutely been near his waistband, albeit for some innocuous reason, and Zimmerman accurately reported this to the dispatcher. She brought the fact up to show Zimmerman was a liar, since Martin was unarmed, when in fact this shows no such thing.
And… The drug thing? I am waiting for the tox screen. Where did she get the information that Martin was clean?
My bad, Bricker. You know, I just figured that since I have no reason to believe the kid was “drugged out”, and no drug paraphenalia was found on his body, then he wasn’t “drugged out”. If the tox data comes back and shows the kid was high as a kite, I’ll eat those words.
Folks in this thread keep talking about Zimmerman being injured, in the absence of medical reports. How about you correct them for treating things as fact when they haven’t been verified by a professional?
What do you think he’s alluding to when he said Martin was holding his hand in his waistband? Do you think he was making an idle non sequiter? I mean, as much I’d like to think “And he’s a black male” is a non sequiter, we all know that it wasn’t. He was explaining why the guy merited immediate attention from law enforcement.
And now you’re either lying or deliberately being retarded. I never said Zimmerman was being a liar because he implied that Martin was armed threat. I brought up it to show that he was wrong and therefore is not a credible authority regarding the kid’s behavior or actual threat level.
Like monstro, I’ve had my fill of nonsensical sniping. Have at it by yourselves.
Are you kidding me? He says “He’s got his hand in his waistband” in the same tone of voice he says “He’s got a button on his shirt”.
So let me get this straight. Zimmerman explicitly states details such as Martin having a button on his shirt, but the fact that he is armed wasn’t worth a direct mention?
You were issued with a different version of common sense than me.
Yeah, you’re going to have to do better than a daily kos blog linked to an Occupy Syndey page.
Nah, this particular black kid hated white people. Plus, I think he had something against Laotians.
Given that the people defending Zimmerman seem to be arguing that he was not being aggressive in stopping and questioning Martin, would they support armed citizens from a group like the Black Panthers patroling white neighborhoods in Florida and questioning passersby?
This is an honest question. It seems to me that it is the natural outcome of SYG laws. If people who don’t see anything wrong with Zimmerman’s actions, but are still opposed to my proposal, could you explain why?
Ah yes, because those of us defending Zimmerman are all just terrified of black people.
No.
Because I can’t tell how you got from “not aggressive” to “nothing wrong.”
My positions that I have not heard enough to create probable cause that Zimmerman is guilty of a crime. How you extrapolate from that to approval of his tactics, I have no idea.
So if you’re asking me if I apply the same standard to Blank Panthers toting guns and patrolling white neighborhoods, the answer is yes: nothing about that makes me believe that there is probable cause to find a crime in that description.
Or are you unable to discern a difference between “see nothing wrong” and “think it’s illegal?”
How about having the Black Panthers patrolling mixed neighborhoods and stopping white people in the neighborhood on legit business or visiting friends?
I can discern a difference between bending over backwards to put one person’s actions in the best possible light, but being uncomfortable with a minority doing the same thing.
You said in post 1538
So I guess you wouldn’t have a problem with the armed Black Panthers stopping citizens and asking questions?
Criminy, I’ll have half the posts in this thread. I assume that when someone says that Martin’s girlfriend says she heard Martin say he was being followed, even though they should qualify it as totem-pole hearsay from Martin’s family’s lawyer, they really meant to add that qualification each time, but assume its obvious. In other words, if there is a source for a claim, I have about given up on demanding that people say, “According to the Martin family lawyer’s account of the girlfriend’s account of the phone call…”
By the same token, Zimmerman’s lawyer is the source for the Zimmerman injury. It is, of course, nowhere near a factually solid claim, but at least there is some reason beyond imagination to say that Zimmerman was injured. My own feeling, of course, is that I have no idea if he was injured or not.
In contrast, there is no source for the definitive claim that Zimmerman was wrong when he said Martin looked drugged out. The mere fact that no drug paraphernalia was on his body doesn’t in the least compel the conclusion.
Now, the same argument would apply to anyone that said Martin definitively was involved with drugs. No reliable evidence indicates that is true. I don’t think Zimmerman’s comment means a damn thing, and I don’t regard these reports about high school discipline as meaning anything.
In short, there is no evidence in either direction, and no one can make any definitive statement either way. As to Martin’s phoe call and Zimmerman’s injury, they both have sources that are making direct claims — still unproven, but at least something to say, “According to lawyer so-and-so…”
Agreed on the waistband – Zimmerman was suggesting the possibility of a weapon. But again, he may have been accurately reporting where Martin’s hand was. That makes him mistaken about the conclusion, but not a liar.
As to the black male comment… Zimmerman could simply have been providing a description. Any bolo broadcast starts out with a mention of race.
Or he could have been implying that the fact that Martin was a blck male was another indicia of dangerousness.
I don’t know. Neither do you.
You seriously cannot distinguish between “someone has a right to do it” and “I wouldn’t have a problem with them doing it”?
You have the right to stand in the middle of the sidewalk on a busy street and cuss out every passerby in strongest terms. I would have a problem with you doing it. But I would still think you have the right to do it.
But he wasn’t wrong, that you know of. Martin’s hands could have been near his waistband. If so, then he scrupulously reported only the actual facts as he saw them, with no embellishments, making him very credible indeed.
See the problem?
In fact, as between you and Zimmerman, I can find more incorrect claims of fact made by you in this thread than we know of from Zimmerman.
A. “stagger”? How does he “stagger” when the position he was in, according to the “Zimmerman had to defend himself” story, is on top of zimmerman, who was on his back on the ground. This means that he was on his knees with his legs spread widely apart. If he was shot in the chest from that position, do you think it’s believable that he would remain alive long enough, not to mention remain strong long enough to maneuver himself up and on to his feet? Where his body landed and the blood spatter and staining are all evidence of what happened.
B. If he’s staggering from a gunshot wound to the chest and Zimmerman is on his feet as well and pushes him…Zimmerman’s self-defense argument gets shot all to hell as far as I’m concerned. (No pun intended)
Indeed: Zimmerman was an unreasonably suspicious type, elevating his suspicion to deadly paranoia.
OH! You mean Martin was suspicious! What exactly was so suspicious about Martin?
I don’t think that he was a racist interested in bagging him a darky.
I do think he was a paranoid, delusional wannabe who lost all perspective in his unhealthy desire to be a hero, sacrificing an innocent kid in his zeal to make that happen.
He said everything in exactly the same tone until he thought Martin was “getting away” by “oh shit!” running… which is the only time in the conversation that Zimmerman shows any kind of distress, excitement, or concern, when he thinks Martin is “getting away”.
By the way, if Zimmerman thought he Martin was so scary coming towards him…why was he so concerned that Martin was NOT coming towards him? Why did he care if Martin was running? If Martin wasn’t running towards Zimmerman, what was the problem at all?
I’m still wondering why he didn’t call his father. His father was a lot closer than the police. For that matter, did they every find Martin’s phone?
I was reading that the grand jury will convene on April 10th. It is going to be a long couple of weeks.
As American citizens, the Panthers have the right to approach anyone on the street and ask them questions. As long as the person they approach is free to disregard their inquires and go about their business, they have not infringed on any rights.
Which is what I said about Zimmerman. Same answer.
This information isn’t from Zimmerman’s lawyer. It was first reported by the Orlando Sentinel and appears to have been leaked by someone in the police department.
BTW, I noticed it took less than 15 days to pass 2000 posts is that anywhere close to a record?
Zimmerman doesn’t show any indication of being scared of Martin. He’s upset that Martin is running because he thinks he is a thief that will get away.
Read the transcript again carefully , from the beginning. The question of race is brought up originally by the dispatcher, not Zimmerman.
Notice Zimmerman’s exact words. He looks black. Zimmerman’s not sure at this point; Martin is too far away. A little later we get:
So now Martin is close enough for Zimmerman to be sure that he is black, and passes that info to the dispatcher. Info the Dispatcher requested.
I suppose Zimmerman should have said, “You know, I’ve been reading some stuff on the internet, and while I believe in gender, I don’t believe in race.”